Despite Prime Minister Anthony Albanese’s attempts to talk it down, there is no question that sports betting advertising is harmful to children.
Like cigarette and alcohol advertising, gambling is an adult vice to which experts universally agree children should not be exposed.
The evidence is terrifying. For example, a Deakin University study in 2016 found children as young as eight recalling betting brand names and promotional offers.
One 14-year-old boy told researchers that because it was “everywhere, the ads make you want to bet”. A 10-year-old said: “Every time there is sport on, I’m like, I’m going to bet $5 for the Socceroos to win.”
The study found children were strongly influenced by gambling advertising, particularly for sports betting.
The report said children described that advertising made betting seem “easy” or “fun”, while others stated that gambling advertisements showed that “everyone wins”.
Almost half identified sports betting as the most popular gambling product they could think of.
So when the late Labor MP Peta Murphy held the Murphy inquiry, it had already been a long time coming.
The evidence and testimony in its final report You Win Some, You Lose More was irrefutable: its recommendations enjoyed bipartisan support and it was heralded by harm-reduction advocates as a game changer.
Public support for the reforms is 70% in favour of a total ad ban.
Everybody — except the gambling industry — wants the reforms to go ahead.
The PM’s failure to finalise the bill, pushing instead for a partial ban, gave the Greens and cross-benchers live ammunition. The backlash against not adopting the full ad ban was so bad it triggered an internal Labor revolt.
It’s now an election year. The ad ban has an effective approval rating of 70%, while Albanese just polled a net approval of minus 20 — less popular than Peter Dutton.
Labor desperately needs a populist win. So why the delaying tactics?
Questions inevitably turned to the gambling lobby and whether it is once again rigging the game in the house’s favour.
Under the influence
The gambling lobby’s hyper-privileged access to the PM, premiers and regulators is well documented and has become endemic.
When the Murphy reforms stalled, speculation mounted that Albanese, staring down the barrel of electoral defeat, was about to dead-ball the deal to smooth the ruffled feathers of the sports betting industry and its mogul media mates.
The gambling lobby’s privileged access to the PM’s office was highlighted by documents uncovered by ACT Independent Senator David Pocock.
While the PM claimed public interest immunity over an undisclosed amount of the requested information, the 41 redacted pages that were released last October paint what Pocock called “a disturbing picture of the level of access gambling companies and their representatives have to the Prime Minister and his office”.
“More than a year after the Murphy Review recommendations were handed down, Australians deserve answers about why the government still hasn’t acted to curb the serious harm from gambling advertising.”
Albanese’s diary
Pocock’s fears were validated when, on January 20, an extract from the PM’s 2024 diary was published.
Obtained by the Financial Review under Freedom of Information laws, it showed an entire Friday afternoon devoted to phone conferences, and meet and greets with the CEOs, chairs and VPs of Cricket Australia, AFL, NRL and Channels 7, 9 and 10.
albanese_diary.jpg
Just 12 days after this CEO love-in, the PM and Communications Minister Michelle Rowland suddenly announced the first, of what would become multiple, delays around the gambling ad ban legislation.
Albanese tried to justify a switch to a partial ban, stammering some unverifiable statistics about gambling harm that alluded to sports betting being a lesser evil than the pokies where, he said, “70%” of the harm lay.
His comments were so inaccurate that, in response to media questions, Deputy PM Richard Marles defended his boss, saying Albanese had been “relying on memory”.
That “clarification” will be cold comfort for the increasing number of families impacted by alarming rates of gambling-related suicides, outlined in yet another reputable report insisting it is essential that the Murphy ad-ban laws be enacted in full.
Albanese and Rowland’s time frames for reform have gone from mid-2024 to late 2024 and then to “some time in 2025” — most likely after the election.
Vested interests
The Greens have long been critical of Labor’s lack of action on gambling reform.
Sarah Hanson-Young, South Australian Greens Senator and communications spokesperson, remains scathing of both major parties caving in to vested interests, telling Green Left that “Labor and Peter Dutton have failed families on gambling ads.
“Addiction, family breakdowns and financial hardship will be worse this summer in Australia because the Albanese Government has sold out to Sportsbet.”
Hanson-Young currently has the Interactive Gambling Amendment (Ban Gambling Ads) Bill before parliament, which would ban gambling advertising in line with the Murphy inquiry recommendations.
Hanson-Young highlighted the huge community support for the total ban, noting intense voter frustration with the insidious influence of gambling corporations over democracy.
Along with fossil fuel companies, the corrosive influence of a handful of very rich people is one reason trust in politicians is at an all-time low.
“The facts are clear,” Hanson-Young continued. “Australians lose more per capita to gambling addiction than any nation on earth. Expert evidence and 70% of Australians support a full gambling ad ban, but Labor and the Liberals are addicted to the donations, dinners and dirty deals with the gambling lobby.”
The Greens told GL they will move the Ban Gambling Ads Bill when parliament returns and will ensure it remains an election issue. They said the PM and Peter Dutton should “stop selling out to Sportsbet”.