address to parliament - BILLS - Interactive Gambling Amendment (Credit and Other Measures) Bill 2023 - Second Reading

To take up the remarks of the member for Bruce, albeit brief: yes, he is correct when he says that by their very nature credit cards are looking at credit; it's money that gamblers do not have, money that is not in their bank. To ensure that that is a provision of the Interactive Gambling Amendment (Credit and Other Measures) Bill 2023—very much the centre point of the bill—is a good thing, because people shouldn't bet money that they don't have. When they lose, as ultimately they do, that can often lead to a spiral of debt and despair.

As I said, as the member for Bruce said and as the member for Flinders pointed out, they do not have the money. I know that the communications minister, who brings this legislation to the parliament, does, like me, enjoy to have a flutter and to go to the races. Indeed, we've been to the races together with our respective spouses and enjoyed a good afternoon out. And I don't want to be criticised here, but there does come some personal responsibility when it comes to gambling, when it comes to betting. People have to have personal responsibility. We don't want to see nanny-state provisions. We don't want to see wowserism. But I appreciate the points the member for Bruce made, and I appreciate the intent of the minister. I know full well, and I agree completely with, the sentiments expressed by the member for Flinders.

We all know that, for some, betting can lead to harm, not only for themselves, but it also has a terrible impact on their families, carers and other relationships. All too sadly, when disaster relief payments have been made in recent times, in regional areas—I know, speaking from experience—the amount of money put through poker machines at various clubs has soared to record levels. Then when those relief payments were exhausted the trend went south. That is an unfortunate aspect whenever additional money is available that should be spent on other things. That is why, dare I say—and I'm not digressing too far—the cashless welfare debit card was so important, because it meant that money wasn't going to be spent on gambling; it was going to be spent on the practical things of life for those vulnerable remote communities.

In contrast to what the member for Bruce said about this particular bill and other aspects of gambling and the need to curb it, it is why the coalition took positive steps earlier this year with a bill to try to ban gambling ads during live sport—a policy which those opposite voted against. It's why on budget reply night, 11 May 2023, the opposition leader said:

In our country, footy time is family time, but the bombardment of betting ads takes the joy out of televised sports. Worse, they're changing the culture of our country in a bad way and normalising gambling at a young age. Many Australian families have had enough. That's why tonight I announce that a coalition government will move to ban sports betting advertising during the broadcasting of games. Ads would be banned for an hour each side of a sporting game. I encourage the Prime Minister to work with us on this initiative to get it implemented now.

Some of the ads that are put up on television almost seduce the viewer to part with their money, to have a bet, to have a flutter on a team—and if that team leads at half time, you don't lose your bet. There are all of these sorts of things—the sheer bombardment, as the opposition leader called it, the repetition of these ads—which, let's face it, are of concern.

The Wallace report was tabled in November 2021. The election was called on 10 April, arguably giving the coalition no time to legislate, in answer to the member for Bruce's rebuke about why the previous government didn't act. We all come to this place, to be fair, in an effort to ensure that those people who cannot help themselves, who have a gambling problem, have good and tight and secure legislation that encompasses the elements contained herein.

As I said, most of the changes proposed in this bill are not new. They were recommended by an inquiry by the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Corporations and Financial Services in late 2021. It was a review into regulation of the use of financial services such as credit cards and digital wallets as payment for online gambling in Australia, chaired by the member for Fisher. It recommended a ban on the use of credit cards and digital wallets as payment methods for online gambling.

The Wallace inquiry report cited total customer losses in Australia at—wait for it—$25 billion. That is $25 billion going down the gurgler. That is $25 billion that could be spent on building community capacity, on helping families, on making sure that people don't get into that cycle of debt and despair, as I referenced earlier. Responsible Wagering Australia said 20 per cent of Australian consumers were using credit cards with their online wagering accounts.

The inquiry report highlighted the combination of online gambling and credit exacerbated problem gambling and its associated social and financial harms. It said that this combination could lead to:

… extreme financial hardship, loss of—

job—

bankruptcy, and broader harms including relationship breakdown, mental illness and homelessness—

and, even worse, suicide. We know that. And the report identified:

… two key reasons for the speed and severity of the harm from combining online gambling and credit.

I know the bill would provide for a new criminal offence and for civil penalties under the situation with methods determined by the minister to:

… prohibit an operator of a regulated interactive gambling service … from accepting or offering to accept payments from a customer … in Australia using: a credit card; payments linked to a credit card (including digital wallets); digital currency (such as cryptocurrency); or other methods determined by the Minister.

The bill is good inasmuch as it ensures that credit cards are very much looked at, but it neglects to resolve a major loophole in the form of video game loot boxes and item trading. The bill doesn't extend to credit cards that may be used by children and adults to purchase in-game digital currencies and loot crates that are then used to gamble. I'm not quite sure whether this is an oversight. I'm not quite sure whether this can be looked at. But the industry is being used as a means of money laundering and scams—that is a sad fact—with billions of dollars being easily channelled into the market and becoming very, very difficult to trace in what is a highly unregulated industry.

I have young children. Well, they're not so young now. But my two boys certainly enjoyed video games, and I know there are other parents in this place whose children currently do or formerly did. Many popular video games are getting more sophisticated and more enhanced. They now offer a digital marketplace in which items, costumes and weapons in games can be obtained through purchasing in-game items with real money or by spending money to open what are called loot crates, which give items of varying values purely by chance. These items are not only used in games where they may offer a competitive advantage but often resold for real currency in a speculative market. This speculative market is based upon the rarity of the item. I have seen a weapon skin in one popular video game sell for—wait for it!—more than US$400,000. That's an extraordinary figure. It truly is. Many of these games contain loot box features, and their online gambling markets can be worth billions of dollars.

Ordinary, everyday kids and mums and dads across Australia are playing these games every day and being introduced to online gambling. They do it in all innocence. They do it because they enjoy it. It has features that make kids want to play it more often, get better at it and get to the next level. But sophisticated game makers are inventing and producing these videos that are introducing otherwise innocent children to a world of online gambling. It can lead to spending way too much time on these games, getting caught up and then using mum and dad's credit card, if mum and dad are off doing other things and the child is left as a latchkey kid. The child might know the PINs et cetera. Then things can get out of hand.

It's adults, too. I know many adults enjoy these games to destress from work. They're spending thousands of dollars out of addiction or are in an attempt to make money through gambling. Of course, once you're in the cycle, it's hard to then get out of that cycle. There's absolutely no doubt about it: it's a de facto form of gambling. It's addictive. I would say it has a seductive appeal to children. But it is exempt from the gambling bill.

In summary, this is legislation that is good and worthwhile. There are elements of it that could be improved. I know there have been amendments put forward. Often that is the case. The inquiry report's findings were backed up by the results of a recent review into this bill by the Senate Environment and Communications Legislation Committee. I want to note a couple of things there. The Senate inquiry report, which was tabled recently, identified that 30 per cent or nearly a third of Australian online gamblers—that's around a million people—were at risk of, or experiencing, a degree of gambling harm. That is a tragic figure. The report cited research by the Gambling Treatment and Research Clinic at the University of Sydney, which found that 54 per cent of surveyed participants who reported using their credit card for online gambling met criteria for problem gambling. Gambling using credit cards is already banned at land based sites. This issue now is about the use of credit cards for online gambling.

When it comes to gambling, in New South Wales recently the government there has taken action to deliver on the election commitment it made to reduce problem gambling by moving to ban external signage, such as 'VIP lounge', from pubs and clubs across the state by 1 September 2023. I note, interestingly, that a letter to the editor in my local newspaper today indicated that pubs are still putting up signs saying, 'Open until 3 am.' Some might wonder why pubs would be open till 3 am in country centres, but, still, the state government felt the need to ban that gambling-related signage. That happened in September.

We need to do more to ensure that people's hard-earned money is not wasted on gambling. We need to do more to help problem gamblers. At the same time, as I've said before, we also can't go down the path of becoming a nanny state, and we certainly can't go down the path that some would, which is banning gambling altogether. At the end of the day, some of these industries contribute vitally to this nation. I would also put forward that the horseracing industry employs 80,000 people, and most of those are in regional Australia.

Mr Hill interjecting—

Mr McCORMACK: Giddy-up! Thank you, Member for Bruce. Without those horseracing clubs, communities would be much the poorer, and certainly our charitable organisations would be much the poorer, because they rely on horseracing, thoroughbred clubs—trots and greyhounds too—to earn the dollars that they otherwise could not raise themselves.