Speaker 1: I'm Ruby Jones and you're listening to seven Am. A
Speaker 1: letter to Prime Minister Anthony Albernezi has reopened the fight
Speaker 1: over gambling reform inside the Labor Party. MPs say they
Speaker 1: want change but are too scared to speak publicly. It
Speaker 1: comes as a Four Corners investigation has shown how much
Speaker 1: online betting is harming Australians and their families, and how
Speaker 1: the systems meant to protect them are failing the Government
Speaker 1: says it's acting, pointing to measures like bettstop and ID checks,
Speaker 1: but a cross party inquiry led by the late Peter
Speaker 1: Murphy called for much more, including an outright ban on
Speaker 1: gambling advertising, and two and a half years on, they
Speaker 1: haven't acted on any of its recommendations. Today, ABC investigative
Speaker 1: reporter Steve Knaine on what his Four Corners reporting uncovered
Speaker 1: and how Labour MPs are being kept quiet. It's Thursday,
Speaker 1: November thirteenth, so I thought we could begin with this
Speaker 1: letter to the Prime Minister that you got a hold of.
Speaker 1: Can you tell me what it's set?
Speaker 2: Yeah, it's a letter written by Andrew Wilkie addressed to
Speaker 2: the Prime Minister, who he knows quite well and he
Speaker 2: has respect for and he's calling on him to allow
Speaker 2: a free voting parliament on legislation to ban gambling advertising.
Speaker 2: And he said in that letter that he believed that
Speaker 2: an advertising ban had strong community support and that the
Speaker 2: policy also had substantial backing in the Parliament. And he said,
Speaker 2: and I'm quoting as evidenced by the number of our
Speaker 2: parliamentary colleagues who've approached me since the recent ABC four
Speaker 2: Corners program on online gambling. And he goes on to
Speaker 2: say it would be naive for the government to think
Speaker 2: it can continue to stonewall or drag out addressing the issue,
Speaker 2: and that a free vote would be an effective way
Speaker 2: to break the deadlock.
Speaker 3: And he's referring there.
Speaker 2: To the government's inaction on the parliamentary inquiry that was
Speaker 2: chaired by the late Labor MP Peter Murphy that handed
Speaker 2: down its report.
Speaker 3: Close to two and a half years ago.
Speaker 4: Now on behalf of the Standing Committee on Social Policy
Speaker 4: and Legal Affairs, I present the committee's report entitled You
Speaker 4: Win Some, You Lose More Online gambling and its impacts
Speaker 4: on those experience in gambling harm.
Speaker 3: And it was a.
Speaker 2: Cross party report that came up with thirty one unanimous
Speaker 2: recommendations including bringing in a national regulator and a national
Speaker 2: ombudsman for online gambling, banning those kind of inducements that
Speaker 2: are used in VIP schemes that keep those addicted gamblers betting,
Speaker 2: and also this ban on gambling advertising, which has really
Speaker 2: dominated the debate in this space.
Speaker 5: The Committee has recommended a phased, comprehensive ban on all
Speaker 5: gambling advertising on all media, broadcast and online of online
Speaker 5: gambling services. It leaves no room for circumvention.
Speaker 2: Partial bands haven't worked, and so Andrew Wilkie wrote this
Speaker 2: letter for a few reasons. He wants action on gambling
Speaker 2: reform has for years now. He thinks there's broad support
Speaker 2: in the Parliament for the matter, and he also believes
Speaker 2: that Labor backbenches are fearful about speaking out.
Speaker 6: There's every chance they know someone with a gambling addiction.
Speaker 6: It could be their mum or their dad, or their
Speaker 6: brother or their sister, or their son or their daughter,
Speaker 6: or their friend or.
Speaker 3: Their work colleague.
Speaker 6: And they look at us and they hear our debates
Speaker 6: and they think, how can those politicians be so selfish
Speaker 6: and so clueless and so weak?
Speaker 1: And is that the case is their broad support among
Speaker 1: Labor MPs and are they afraid of speaking out?
Speaker 2: Well, I spoke to over a dozen members of the
Speaker 2: Labor caucus who want change on this matter. None of
Speaker 2: them would put their names to what they said for
Speaker 2: fear of repercussions. They not only want change, they think
Speaker 2: if it was put to a conscience vote in the
Speaker 2: Parliament that it would pass.
Speaker 3: There's a number of Liberals who want action on this
Speaker 3: as well.
Speaker 2: Peter Dunton wanted action on gambling advertising in the last parliament,
Speaker 2: and of course the crossbencher all wanting action on this
Speaker 2: as well. Now, if you combine the people I spoke
Speaker 2: to and the Labor MPs who are known to support
Speaker 2: change but would not return my calls, and then if
Speaker 2: you look at the condolence motions for the late Labor
Speaker 2: MP Peter Murphy and what a number of Labor MPs
Speaker 2: were saying about the gambling industry, it's fair to say
Speaker 2: that there are dozens of people in the Labor caucus
Speaker 2: who want change on.
Speaker 1: This Okay, So if that is the case, then what
Speaker 1: do you know about the way that the Prime Minister's
Speaker 1: office is responding to this kind of broad consensus that
Speaker 1: there needs to be some change.
Speaker 2: Well, the Prime Minister had an opportunity to pick up
Speaker 2: on these reforms before the last election. It seems pretty
Speaker 2: clear that the Labor leadership were concerned about the power
Speaker 2: of the lobby groups in that area. I've also been
Speaker 2: told by Labor sources that the Prime Minister's office has
Speaker 2: been putting pressure on advocates for gambling reform within the
Speaker 2: Parliamentary Party to prevent them from speaking up. And I
Speaker 2: certainly spoke to a number of Labor EMPTI he's in
Speaker 2: the lead up to my Four Corners program, hoping to
Speaker 2: convince them to come on the program and talk about
Speaker 2: the matter, but they would not go on camera. I
Speaker 2: asked the PM's office, whether they're staff or senior members
Speaker 2: of the government, put pressure on Labor MPs not to
Speaker 2: speak to Four Corners and also not to speak up
Speaker 2: more broadly on this issue, but they did not answer
Speaker 2: that question.
Speaker 3: So that's where it sits at the moment.
Speaker 1: Okay, So that if that is the case, then that
Speaker 1: the Prime Minister's office perhaps doesn't want people from the
Speaker 1: party to be speaking about this. Can we talk about
Speaker 1: the why why would the Prime minister be reticent to
Speaker 1: take on the gambling industry?
Speaker 2: Well, the gambling industry is incredibly powerful in Australia. But
Speaker 2: it's not just them who would lose out from this legislation.
Speaker 2: If the government was to bring in a ban on
Speaker 2: gambling advertising, they'd be upsetting three powerful lobby groups. That
Speaker 2: would be the gambling industry itself, specifically the sports betting industry,
Speaker 2: also the sporting codes who now make a large cut
Speaker 2: from gambling revenue from betting on their sport and really
Speaker 2: i'm talking there about the NRL and the AFL, but
Speaker 2: also the commercial media, and in particular commercial media that
Speaker 2: has TV stations that rely on gambling advertising for their revenue.
Speaker 2: And of course those commercial TV networks have been under
Speaker 2: a lot of pressure for their business model to succeed
Speaker 2: in recent years because there has been less advertising. It's
Speaker 2: not the golden goose that it used to be, and
Speaker 2: we have seen that in the print media as well.
Speaker 2: So it would involve taking on three powerful lobby groups.
Speaker 2: But that's why Andrew wilk is saying make it a
Speaker 2: free vote, make it across the parties, so that the
Speaker 2: lobby group's power is diminished, that they can't target one
Speaker 2: party over the other.
Speaker 3: I think also there's another thing going on here.
Speaker 2: I think the culturally the PM is sympathetic to the
Speaker 2: sporting codes and the gambling industry. He's a big Souths fan,
Speaker 2: that is genuine. He has been so since he was
Speaker 2: a young boy. You see him in the NRL box
Speaker 2: with Peter's. He took Peter Velandi's to the White House
Speaker 2: for a dinner with Joe Biden. But there's also a
Speaker 2: historical thing going on here. The Prime Minister is very pragmatic.
Speaker 2: He understands the power of the lobby group. He was
Speaker 2: around when Julia Gillard was in minority government had a
Speaker 2: deal with Andrew wilk to bring in mandatory pre commitment
Speaker 2: on poker machines, and he saw the backlash from the
Speaker 2: club's industry and labour MPs including him were targeted by
Speaker 2: the club's industry and in the end that commitment to
Speaker 2: bring in mandatory commitment was broken. So I think there's
Speaker 2: a number of things going on here. The power of
Speaker 2: the lobby groups, the history of the gambling lobby. It's
Speaker 2: a different part of the gambling lobby but did target
Speaker 2: them back in the twenty tens. But also a kind
Speaker 2: of a cultural affinity between Anthony Albanesi and the sporting codes.
Speaker 3: So I think there's a few things going on here.
Speaker 1: Coming up. How Anthony Albanesi often shares talking points with
Speaker 1: the gambling lobby Steve What is the Prime Minister Anthony
Speaker 1: alb Easy and his office saying about the way that
Speaker 1: they are approaching gambling reform.
Speaker 2: Well, they say they've done more to reduce gambling harm
Speaker 2: than any government in Australian history, and they point to
Speaker 2: the fact they brought in betstop and a credit card
Speaker 2: ban ID verification for online gambling.
Speaker 7: Australians will be able to ban themselves from every online
Speaker 7: betting company with just one simple registration. The National Self
Speaker 7: Exclusion Register will also stop gambling companies from sending out
Speaker 7: marketing material with the threat of big fines if they do.
Speaker 3: And now, bet Stop is a good thing.
Speaker 2: It's not a flawless system, but it's definitely improved people's
Speaker 2: lives who've had gambling addictions, there's no doubt about that.
Speaker 2: But I have spoken to people who've still been getting
Speaker 2: contacted by betting agencies courtesy of that. But it should
Speaker 2: be remembered that that was a process that was started
Speaker 2: off under the Liberal government, so it's not entirely down
Speaker 2: to the Labor Party that that is the case. I
Speaker 2: asked the Prime Minister's Office on a couple of occasions,
Speaker 2: name one recommendation that you've taken up from the Murphy Review,
Speaker 2: and they never answer that question. They certainly haven't taken
Speaker 2: up the main recommendations of the Murphy Review, which is
Speaker 2: a ban on advertising, bringing in a national regulator and
Speaker 2: a national mbudsman, having a Minister responsible for all of
Speaker 2: the gambling issues, also banning inducements and banning commissions in
Speaker 2: the industry. They certainly haven't tackled them. I've given them
Speaker 2: an opportunity to tell me of one minor thing that
Speaker 2: they've taken on from the Murphy Review, but they've never
Speaker 2: provided that.
Speaker 1: And you spoke to people within the industry itself, you know,
Speaker 1: people like the CEO of Responsible Wagering Australia. Tell me
Speaker 1: about the case they're making.
Speaker 2: Yeah, Responsible Wagering Australia are a lobby group and a
Speaker 2: peak body group that represents six of the biggest online
Speaker 2: book makers, and I spoke to Kay Campwell, who is
Speaker 2: the CEO of Responsible Wagering. I also put requests to
Speaker 2: a number of the big batting agencies to talk to
Speaker 2: their CEOs and they wouldn't put anyone forward, but Kay
Speaker 2: camp Will did go on camera for four corners. Why
Speaker 2: doesn't the industry support a total band because.
Speaker 8: Total bands won't be effective. Total bands will simply drive
Speaker 8: Australian consumers into the illegal offshore market where there are
Speaker 8: no consumer protections.
Speaker 2: Now, the Murphy Review heard evidence that was contrary to this,
Speaker 2: and they cited the example of Spain that changed the
Speaker 2: lord of prohibit gambling advertising between five am and one am,
Speaker 2: and apparently the Spanish gambling regulator said that the predictions
Speaker 2: of industry had not borne out.
Speaker 8: We've seen evidence internationally, so we've seen evidence in Norway, Denmark, Sweden.
Speaker 8: There is a swede of evidence across the world that
Speaker 8: says that overregulation drives people into the illegal offshore market.
Speaker 2: We spoke to authorities in those countries and they dispute
Speaker 2: what he was saying.
Speaker 1: We've heard the Prime Minister say the same thing as
Speaker 1: well though, right yeah.
Speaker 2: In an interview with Claudia Long of the ABC, he
Speaker 2: mentioned that offshore argument.
Speaker 9: What's in our mind is practicalities of whether people just
Speaker 9: go offshore then there's no revenue at all, they engage
Speaker 9: in gambling with no revenue coming back at all, and
Speaker 9: it doesn't solve the problem.
Speaker 3: He's also used that line the right to punt.
Speaker 10: A gambling is legal in Australia. We respect people's right
Speaker 10: to have a punt, but we also have a responsibility
Speaker 10: to make sure that the industry acts responsibly and that's
Speaker 10: what we're doing.
Speaker 3: Also in question time in Parliament, when he.
Speaker 2: Was asked a question about this last year, he suggested
Speaker 2: that lotteries and loto were causing more harm than online betting.
Speaker 10: More there around about fifteen percent. Off the top of
Speaker 10: my head, it's about that figure comes from lotteries and
Speaker 10: lot o and those tickets as well.
Speaker 2: No one knows where those figures come from. They don't
Speaker 2: stack up with the data. David Pocock Senator David Pocock,
Speaker 2: the Independent Senator for the Act, told me that only
Speaker 2: two people have said that publicly, the Prime Minister and
Speaker 2: Peter Valandi's where.
Speaker 3: Did these starts come from?
Speaker 2: No one knows, No one has any idea and the
Speaker 2: only two people who've said them publicly are Peter Landis
Speaker 2: and the Prime Minister.
Speaker 3: And that's a real worry.
Speaker 2: So there's an argument from the cross benches and people
Speaker 2: who who are advocates for gambling reform, that the Prime
Speaker 2: Minister is mimicking the retoric of the lobby groups here.
Speaker 1: And what is the scope of what Australia is dealing with,
Speaker 1: Steve in terms of the harms of gambling and the
Speaker 1: amount of money that's being lost.
Speaker 2: Well, we lose more per head of population than any
Speaker 2: country in the world. The most recent things we have
Speaker 2: that we lose thirty two billion dollars a year. That's
Speaker 2: not how much we gamble, that's how much we lose.
Speaker 2: And look, the Productivity Commission has looked into this twice.
Speaker 2: They consider it incredibly unproductive that this money is being
Speaker 2: spent in this way, not to mention the social harm
Speaker 2: it affects families. And in our Four Corners program, you know,
Speaker 2: we spoke to people who, courtesy of addictions to online
Speaker 2: sports betting, had family members who'd taken their own lives,
Speaker 2: people who to end up in jail. I've spoken to
Speaker 2: people whose businesses have been defrauded, or people who've had
Speaker 2: financial advisors steal their money because they were in the
Speaker 2: throes of a gambling addiction that was being encouraged by
Speaker 2: VIP managers who work for these sports betting industries and
Speaker 2: everyone you talk to has a story. Everyone knows somebody
Speaker 2: who's been exposed to this kind of harm.
Speaker 1: And the fact that Peter Murphy's review, you know, it's
Speaker 1: two and a half years on her thirty one recommends
Speaker 1: haven't been put in place by the Labor Party. But
Speaker 1: this is the legacy of someone who was incredibly popular
Speaker 1: within the party and well known. So the fact that
Speaker 1: you know there has not been action on this at
Speaker 1: this point in time, what does it say to you, Steve,
Speaker 1: about where the Labor Party is at on this issue
Speaker 1: at the moment.
Speaker 2: Well, they really are dragging their feet on the issue.
Speaker 2: Because it's standard practice that a parliamentary inquiry like this
Speaker 2: that the Government of the day responds within six months,
Speaker 2: and it's now two and a half years. It shows
Speaker 2: you the reticence within the leadership to take on this issue.
Speaker 2: A lot of people say it's the fear of the
Speaker 2: gambling lobby, the fear of the commercial media, the fear
Speaker 2: of the sporting codes. It also shows you the fear
Speaker 2: of the backbench. They're not really speaking out about it,
Speaker 2: despite the fact that there are so many in the
Speaker 2: Labor caucus who believe in gambling reform. I think it
Speaker 2: also speaks to another issue, which is it's not an
Speaker 2: issue that's coming out in polling in focus groups, that
Speaker 2: perhaps this is not an issue compared to say, the
Speaker 2: cost of living. If it was something that was being
Speaker 2: rammed down the politician's throats, and they might take action
Speaker 2: on it. But bear in mind that this committee was
Speaker 2: a cross party committee. They weighed the evidence, they heard
Speaker 2: from all sides of the argument, They got international evidence
Speaker 2: and research. So most people who know the area say
Speaker 2: that it was a very thorough, very rigorous committee process
Speaker 2: and that Peter Murphy came up with some strong recommendations
Speaker 2: that would minimize harm from an industry that many people,
Speaker 2: including many people in the labor Caucus, consider to be
Speaker 2: full of predatory practices.
Speaker 1: Well, Steve, thank you so much for your time.
Speaker 3: My pleasure to be.
Speaker 1: Also in the news, former CFMU leader John Set has
Speaker 1: been arrested and charged by Victoria police after allegedly send
Speaker 1: threatening and harassing emails to a union administrator. The sixty
Speaker 1: one year old has been charged with seven counts of
Speaker 1: using a telecom communications device to menace, harass and defend
Speaker 1: and Australia and Indonesia have agreed on a new security
Speaker 1: treaty that commits the countries to consult each other if
Speaker 1: either is threatened. Prime Minister Anthony Abnezi says the treaty
Speaker 1: also commits to regular security dialogue between leaders and closer
Speaker 1: cooperation in defense and security fields. I'm Ruby Jones. This
Speaker 1: is seven am. Thanks for listening.