The dilemma is clear. Canberrans like clubs. Clubs rely on poker machines. Poker machines can be addictive. Pokies addicts go bankrupt. Some take their own lives.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
or signup to continue reading
In other words, the pleasures of some are paid for by the grief of others.
And it may be a lot of grief. A study published last year in The Lancet medical journal estimated more than one in 25 suicides in Victoria were associated with addiction to gambling. There's no reason to think other jurisdictions are different.
"A range of measures should be introduced to prevent, screen, support, and treat gambling harm," the researchers said.
People have a right to their pleasures, of course. It's their choice.
But it is widely accepted that addictive pleasures may need some regulation (as do cigarettes and alcohol).
What is ACT government policy?
It is confused and contradictory. The Greens' Gaming Minister in the Labor-Greens coalition thinks one thing and the Labor spokesperson on gaming thinks another.
The nub of the difference is whether all poker machines in the ACT should be electronically linked in a network so gamblers can't switch from one machine to another when they hit any preset limit on their losses.
ACT Minister for Gaming Shane Rattenbury (Greens) said (the day after The Canberra Times revealed how gambling addict Raimon Kasurinen had taken his own life) that the ACT should move to a networked system. Gamblers should have limits placed on their losses. They wouldn't be able to switch machines when they hit the limit because the network of poker machines would "know" and block the gambler.
But Labor's spokesperson on gambling, Marisa Paterson, disagrees with the minister's view. "It's not based on the research," she said. "It's not about genuinely reducing gambling harm."
Dr Paterson, who was the director of the Centre for Gambling Research at the ANU, wants a gradual phasing down of the machines, though not to zero.
There were 4906 poker machines in the ACT 10 years ago. Now, it's down to around 3500. She reckoned the number could be cut to a "very minimal" 1000 to 1500 in 20 years' time.
"The greatest harm-minimisation measure is not to have access to machines," she said.
She also wants a system of "cashless gaming" where players have to use cards loaded with money to gamble, but with predetermined limits on losses. Far from the heady atmosphere of the pokies room, gamblers would work out their own limits on losses. The card would then block them from more gaming. As losses hit the limit, they wouldn't be able to reload their gambling cards from a credit card. She is not keen on networking the machines.
But along came Tasmania
It has been fashionable to point at Tasmania as the backward state - but Tasmania is now introducing tough law to protect problem gamblers from themselves. Mr Rattenbury said it was the "the gold standard".
It involves the machines being linked in a network.
By the end of the year, every gambler there will have to have their own unique card to insert into a poker machine to play it. No card; no play.
Each card would have been verified against a driving licence or similar ID.
The card, inserted into a poker machine, would then ensure the gambler limits their losses to $100 per day, $1000 per month, and $5000 per year.
The ACT is the only jurisdiction without networked machines. Mr Rattenbury wants them. Dr Paterson doesn't.
The snag is that to introduce a similar scheme in the ACT could cost $70 million. Mr Rattenbury said the clubs should pay.
Is Labor conflicted?
Patrons of Canberra's four Labor clubs lost $18,913,918 on poker machines in 2022, the latest Labor clubs' annual report revealed. The Labor clubs declare one of their aims is to "promote and support the Australian Labor Party", but they do not disclose how much of the pokies money ends up funding the party (and so, funding the election of Labor MLAs).
There is now an arm's-length relationship between clubs and party. Labor has its 1973 Foundation into which clubs' money goes and from which party money comes.
But the route is opaque.
One of the country's most respected experts on gambling is uneasy about the relationship.
"This arrangement was put in place to reduce the visibility of the party's reliance on pokies losses," said Charles Livingstone, of Monash University.
"I can't see how this relationship can be maintained if Labor is genuinely committed to reform."
And the Liberals?
"We are of the view that the gaming model in Canberra is the best in the country," Liberals gaming spokesman Mark Parton said.
His argument is the clubs are valuable facilities for communities, but they need the money from their poker machines to offer excellent, affordable entertainment.
"You can't replicate what these clubs do without a pokies base," he said.
He cites pokies-free Western Australia where one club he went to was "pretty much a shed". "They run a kitchen on a Friday night. It works for them but it's not the Vikings. It's not the Southern Cross Club," Mr Parton said.
He accepts there are gamblers who get into great difficulty. "Does that mean that we should stop everybody from participating? Some people are of that belief. I certainly am not," he said.
That unfashionable word, 'class'
A quarter of the people who play pokies in the ACT had an income of less than $50,000 per year in 2019 when the ANU researched the matter. They are at the low income end of the Canberra range; the median Canberran earns around $60,000.
Dr Paterson argues to put a limit on losses of $5000 a year (as Tasmania is doing) could push poor people even further into poverty. They might bet to the limit.
For many Canberrans, $5000 doesn't sound much but for many, it's significant money, and if they were allowed to lose $5000 a year, they might well do so - devastatingly for them.
An expert view
Charles Livingstone heads the Gambling and Social Determinants unit at Monash University's School of Public Health. He has researched the effects of gambling around the world.
He thinks systems of precommitment (where gamblers decide on their maximum loss away from the poker machines) work - but they need to be cast-iron so addicted gamblers can't find ways around them.
"Precommitment systems in Norway, Finland, Germany have been highly effective in practice (and when introduced in Tasmania and Victoria will likely be similarly effective). The design is critical, but we have sufficient evidence to know what is going to work," he said.
He also doesn't accept the argument tougher rules on poker machines would push gamblers online.
"There is no evidence of this happening when such systems are introduced - notably in Norway where rates of harmful gambling declined dramatically when slot machines were firstly removed, and then replaced with networked slots using pre-commitment systems," he said.
But there is a particular difficulty for the ACT: "It would be good for Canberra to be pokies-free, but to a significant extent that would be watered down by the easy accessibility of pokies in NSW. There seems little prospect of those in NSW being restricted any time soon."