Senate debates

Tuesday, 13 February 2018

Matters of Public Importance

Gambling

4:28 pm

Photo of Richard ColbeckRichard Colbeck (Tasmania, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

If ever there were a demonstration of the fact that the Greens live in a parallel universe, this motion is it. As Senator Seselja said just a moment ago: while criticising the government and the opposition for taking donations from the gambling sector, the good senator admitted to the fact that the Greens take donations from a professional gambler, noting that one of the things that particular gentleman, David Walsh from MONA, wants to do is set up a new casino in Tasmania. So not only do they live in a parallel universe but they also don't come here with clean hands.

Then, when you consider the context of the matter of public importance itself, it seems as though they've been living under a rock for the last 12 months. It's no secret that I haven't been in this chamber for the last 18 months, but I have seen firsthand during that period of time the efforts that the government has been going to, working at a national level, sometimes with the cooperation of the states and territories and sometimes not, with the gambling industry and with those who don't support the gambling industry—like the community services sector, who have concerns about those who can't manage their own gambling—to make some changes.

Minister Fifield, for example, has successfully negotiated and legislated through this place changes to broadcasting laws that will see a welcome change in gambling advertising on television—a clear demonstration of the activity of government over the last 12 months in relation to the management, at a national level, of gambling. It demonstrates that this motion by the Greens doesn't really reflect the reality of what's occurring, the work happening now that was instigated by the former minister, Minister Tudge, who I know actively sought to put in place a national consumer protection framework for those who were engaging in gambling—in particular in online gambling but also in gambling across the board—so that there were some protections in place.

That is national leadership taken by this government. It was taken by the former minister, Minister Tudge, because he was passionately involved with a case where one of his constituents had been hurt and because he wanted to make a difference during his time in the portfolio. I saw firsthand that passion and desire. I worked with him to achieve the principles of a national consumer protection framework, which had things like a national self-exclusion register, which worked across the online platforms, and the removal of credit betting. These are measures that are making a difference.

The Greens motion today doesn't even stand up in the context of being in the real world, because this government is actively taking measures to protect people who need that protection, because they can't manage it themselves. It's been good to see both the gambling sector and the community services sector working closely to make sure that the intentions of the government's reforms are actually met, because there are those, and they're not necessarily those you might expect, that are opposed to some of the changes.

We're looking at things such as voluntary precommitments: the opportunity for a consumer, at an early stage in their involvement with a gambling entity, to set their own targets. That is the best way for these things to work. We are not going to change the world overnight—and not by putting in some artificial measures that the Greens might like to think would work—but we are actively working in this space to provide the measures that will make a genuine difference, and some of those I've already mentioned. Precommitment—when someone signs up for a gambling account—is an important part of that process. They know what they can afford to spend. They know what their patterns are. The opportunity for them to be advised of how much they're spending, through reports back to them that are easily accessible, is also an important part of the process.

It's quite confounding to me that just last night the Greens voted against the cashless credit card, a process and a mechanism that might not be a silver bullet but is something that has already been proven to significantly reduce spending on gambling in communities that are at risk. So we see not only the blindness to what is actually happening but the hypocrisy of the Greens when they vote against something that government has put forward for communities that has already clearly been demonstrated to provide a significant reduction in gambling. In fact, 48 per cent of gamblers in the communities where the card has already been trialled are gambling less, and yet the Greens vote against that and then come in here to criticise the government for not doing enough while they themselves are inhibiting government attempts to improve outcomes for those who are susceptible to gambling. You really cannot understand where the logic comes from. I know logic and the Greens in the same sentence really don't mix, but it is helpful that they continue to demonstrate that through their actions.

This government, through Minister Fifield, is providing a reduction in gambling advertising on television, and I don't know too many people who don't welcome that. In fact, in the Great Hall on budget night last year the fact that we won't be pestered by gambling advertising before 8.30 of an evening was probably the only announcement that received spontaneous applause from those present. It is a real measure that will improve the lot. It is outlawing credit betting and has measures to block international betting sites. If you look at the current debate in Tasmania, where the Labor Party is proposing to ban pokies, you see the naivety of that policy. The Labor Party is looking to take pokies out of pubs and clubs, and the naivety of that will just see people move to online gambling on overseas gambling sites with no taxation to the Australian government, no protections in respect of their spending and a real likelihood that their financial details will fall into the wrong hands and they will end up in further pain.

So the policy that's currently being proposed in Tasmania by the Labor Party is completely naive and supported, I might say, by the Greens in their own parallel universe. And yet they come in here and criticise the government that over the last 18 months has taken real, practical actions that will work, that are supported broadly by the community and that, might I add, have had support from the gambling sector. So the complete hypocrisy of the Greens is again demonstrated along with that life in a parallel universe where they don't understand what's actually going on and yet they themselves voted against a measure in this place last night that will improve the lot of those susceptible to gambling. (Time expired)

Comments

No comments