The proposed anti-pokies laws

A commenter on a previous post asked a question about where the various parties might stand on Nick Xenophon’s “pokies Bill” which seeks to ban ATMs from poker machine venues.  I thought I would answer it through a specific post, so I could detail some of the current activity surrounding this issue.

Senator Xenophon’s pokies Bill – formally called the ATMs and Cash Facilities in Licensed Venues Bill 2008, is currently being examined by the Senate Community Affairs Committee, chaired by Queensland Senator Claire Moore, who has a reputation as a fair and even-handed Chair. 

Senator Fielding from Family First has also introduced the Poker Machine Harm Minimisation Bill 2008 and the Poker Machine Harm Reduction Tax (Administration) Bill 2008, both of which appeared after Senator Xenophon had been elected but before he was sworn in to his place in the Senate.

All three Bills are currently being examined together by the Senate Committee as part of the one inquiry.  Submissions received thus far are available here and here. There have been two public hearings so far, with a third later this week.

It is due to report on November 10, so the position of the various parties will be clearer at that time. I believe the Green’s are likely to be supportive of the intent of the legislation, assuming there are no technical issues with the drafting or implementation of it. I am less sure what position the major parties are likely to take.

As all these Bills are non-government ones (usually called Private Senators’ Bills), it means that while there may be some debate on them in the Senate, there will not be a formal vote on any or all of them without the agreement of the major parties. Even if any of them were to pass the Senate, it would still require the government’s support for it to be debated and passed by the House of Representatives.

The success rate for private Senators Bills is not very high, with only eleven passing into law since 1901.  However, the fact that the two Senators behind these pokies Bills are also the two pivotal balance of power Senators certainly increases their chances of success.

In any case, this low number does not include other Bills which, while not passing in their own right, were adopted in some way or other by the government in their own legislation, or inserted in a similar form via amendments to a government Bill.  This is what happened, for example, with the legislation which stopped the damming of the Franklin River. The Democrats’ World Heritage Properties Protection Bill 1982 , introduced by NSW Senator Colin Mason, was passed by the Senate with the support of then Labor Opposition, but was stalled in the House of Reps by the then Fraser government. But when the Hawke government was elected a few months later, it reintroduced similar legislation with the same intent, which was able to save the Franklin (after the legislation narrowly survived a High Court appeal, through a 4-3 judgement).

There’s no doubt there is major concern amongst many community based welfare groups about the harm caused problem gamblers using poker machines and I expect that pressure will only continue to increase as the evidence of the extent of that harm grows. The Community Affairs Committee will be assessing whether these Bills are a workable and effective way of reducing that harm. It will be interesting to see the judgement/s of the Senators on the Committee on that topic and whether they put forward other ideas on how to address the issue.