Welcome to Eureka Street

back to site

AUSTRALIA

Gillard's gambling problem

  • 31 October 2011

Tara Moriarty, secretary of the NSW branch of the Liquor and Hospitality Union, has made perhaps the most useful contribution to the current debate on poker machine reform.

She distanced her union from clubs industry claims, insisting the union was 'certainly not buying into' the 'probably over-stated' campaign. But she stressed that 'it doesn't mean that the workers shouldn't have a seat at the table during this process to make sure that their jobs are protected'.

Her comments reflect an appreciation that care for problem gamblers needs to be balanced against care for workers whose jobs are threatened. 

The Federal Government, on the other hand, is open to the accusation that it regards the jobs as expendable because its survival depends upon the successful passage through parliament of the mandatory pre-commitment legislation. Moreover the Prime Minister's ostensibly empathetic assertion that 'too many people would know a family torn apart by problem gambling' could be disingenuous.

Many people also know families torn apart by unemployment, and there is an onus on Julia Gillard to demonstrate that she is primarily motivated by an ethic of care for the wellbeing of her citizens, and not her own political survival. If this is the case, it follows that she will look after workers affected by the pre-commitment technology.

Assistance provided for workers to make the transition to alternative employment is not the same as the compensation packages that will be sought by the clubs industry and affected gambling entrepreneurs such as James Packer, whose business models rely on profiting from the misery of problem gamblers and their families. 40 per cent of the clubs' profits come from people addicted to poker machines. These profits should be regarded as ill-gotten, and therefore not deserving compensation.

That figure is quoted by Rev. Tim Costello, who chairs the Australian Churches Gambling Taskforce. He suggests that clubs dependent upon problem gambling revenue are 'operating [on] an unsustainable business model and should seek advice from Western Australia, where there are no poker machines outside the casino, yet communities and clubs thrive'. 

There will be ambit claims for compensation if the ethic of care is obscured by the greed of the clubs and gambling entrepreneurs.

There are arguments that pre-commitment technology is a sign of the 'nanny state' at work and therefore a threat to civil liberties. Nanny state rhetoric is a ruse that gives licence to those who are greedy, or psychologically robust, to prey on the