An Assembly inquiry has recommended scrapping the $250-a-day limit on ATM withdrawals in clubs, but wants it replaced with a $250 limit on the amount that can be pre-loaded into a poker machine.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
or signup to continue reading
The recommendations were supported by Labor and Liberal, but opposed by the sole Greens member, Shane Rattenbury, who said the $250 withdrawal limit should not be scrapped but strengthened to stop clubs getting around it by allowing gamblers to get money out through EFTPOS instead.
The inquiry into the future of the clubs industry, which reported on Tuesday, was chaired by Brendan Smyth (Liberal).
Despite calls from anti-gambling advocates for a crackdown on poker machines, the committee only suggested two significant changes in the operation of machines – a $250 limit on the amount that can be loaded before a gambler begins play, and a recommendation that all payouts of more than $800 be paid by electronically, rather than in cash. Once the pre-loading limit was in place, the government should remove the restriction on feeding in $50 and $100 notes, the committee said.
The committee also shied away from suggesting a crackdown on the amount that can be bet, recommending that the ACT lobby the federal government for a national limit of $1 per spin, rather than the ACT going it alone.
Pointing to the failure of the Gillard government to push through $1 bets, Mr Rattenbury said Canberra should not wait for national action, but make the change itself. He was out-voted by Labor and Liberal.
The committee did, however, recommend the government re-establish a full professorial chair in gambling studies at the Australian National University. It said the amount paid by clubs to community groups – including their own sporting codes – should be boosted from 8 per cent of poker machine profits to 10 per cent and said the government should match the money paid by clubs into the problem gambling assistance fund.
The committee did not make a recommendation on ticket-in, ticket-out technology, introduced this year to allow gamblers to insert a ticket rather than cash into poker machines. Mr Rattenbury said "TITO" distanced gamblers from the money they were spending and should be limited to $250.
The committee made a series of recommendations to help clubs shift away from reliance on gambling, but said any land lost for community use by club developments should be compensated by the creation of new community land.
It said the rules should be changed to enable "contemporary access" to clubs, presumably aimed at ending the era of having to sign in to enter. And it said "entertainment precincts" should be set up around groups of clubs to allow higher noise levels and live music.
Clubs ACT head Jeff House welcomed the report, although the suggestion of changing sign-in rules took him by surprise.
The $250 ATM limit was not an effective way of reducing problem gambling and placed clubs at a disadvantage alongside clubs in NSW, he said.
As for the muted nature of the anti-gambling measures, he said: "The objective of the committee was not to make things more difficult for the clubs industry. The inquiry was about the future of the ACT clubs sector and…everyone who spoke in the chamber today acknowledged the fact that clubs are important to the community; their survival is important for Canberra. The committee unanimously recognised that clubs do need to diversify – industry agrees with that – and that there is a clear role for government in facilitating and supporting that diversification."
The government will respond next month.
