Samantha Donovan: It’s been 14 months since a federal parliamentary inquiry recommended a comprehensive ban on gambling advertising, but the government is yet to provide its response. Some media reports have been speculating it may be leaning towards a cap on the number of gambling ads rather than a ban, and that has public health experts worried. Luke Radford has more.
Luke Radford: Professor Samantha Thomas is one of Australia’s leading researchers on the impacts of gambling, and right now she’s deeply frustrated with the government’s efforts to reform laws around advertising for online gambling. She’s worried the minister is consulting more with the gambling companies than public health experts.
Samantha Thomas: Well, over the last 14 months, we’ve really had very limited contact with the minister. We had a short half an hour meeting with Michelle Rowlands last December, but really, I think given the evidence base that we have about the impact of gambling ads, particularly on children and the normalisation of gambling for children, we have over a decade of research now that shows that gambling ads have a huge impact on the normalisation of gambling for children. The evidence base is very clear, and we’re curious about why the minister and the government won’t engage more with public health experts around an issue that poses such a significant health threat to children.
Luke Radford: In June last year, a bipartisan parliamentary inquiry led by late Labor MP Peter Murphy recommended a comprehensive ban on all forms of advertising for online gambling. Professor Thomas has been a strong supporter of that call for a ban, arguing the government should enact the recommendation in full.
Samantha Thomas: The gambling industry is one of, I think, the most creative and innovative health-harming industries that we have seen in modern times. They have been extraordinarily good at shifting their marketing tactics, at getting around regulations. We’re seeing this in multiple countries in the world. You know, we need a government who’s bold and brave and who is prepared to stand up to these predatory industries. Kids are calling for it, the community is calling for it. Why won’t the government act?
Luke Radford: Professor Thomas and her colleague, Emeritus professor Mike Daube, have co-authored a letter asking to be given access to the same level of ministerial briefings as betting and media companies have. The ABC contacted the office of Minister Michelle Rowland to seek her response. A spokesperson told the ABC the government continues to engage with stakeholders, regarding the recommendations from the online wagering inquiry. Freedom of information documents show meetings have been held by the minister’s office staff, with groups including betting companies, sporting competitions, television companies and social and health organisations. Independent senator David Pocock says when the process began, it looked like there was strong consensus to support a ban, but that consensus appears to be weakening.
David Pocock: We had a multi-partisan backed report. They looked at the status quo and they said, this is no good, this is having huge implications. And they recommended a phased in ban of all gambling advertising. We’re now hearing about a proposal to cap rather than ban gambling advertising, which is a total cop out. And I’d argue that’s a betrayal of the work and legacy of that committee and the late Peter Murphy, who put a huge amount into this. And it’s not often you have multi-partisan backed committee reports in parliament. We should be implementing the report in full.
Luke Radford: Senator Pocock also called out what he says is secrecy being enforced by the government.
David Pocock: When stakeholders are required to sign non-disclosure agreements, I think it’s a really poor way to develop policy, but seems to be fairly standard. And we’ve seen industry sources have come out and talk about what is being proposed, which sounds like a pretty patchy ban. And we know from other jurisdictions that when you have a patchy ban, you get patchy results because gambling companies just find other ways to advertise.
Luke Radford: The ABC contacted Australia’s peak body for betting companies responsible wagering Australia, but it said it was unable to comment on the process because it has signed a non-disclosure agreement. Questions have also been raised about the relationship between Australia’s sporting codes and the betting companies, especially after former AFL boss Gil McLaughlin’s appointment as boss of betting company TabCorp. Senator Pocock again.
David Pocock: It’s a huge problem. If the government had have had the courage to implement the Murphy review recommendations before Gil McLaughlin got that job, I dare say he probably wouldn’t have got it. Like he’s there surely for the inside knowledge, the inner workings of sport. And we’ve seen an incredibly cosy relationship. This now is beyond just advertising revenue. It’s part of the revenue model of some of these sports.
Samantha Donovan: The independent Senator David Pocock,