Victoria

Dec 1, 2017

Mayne: major parties ram through another $70 billion in pokies losses

Extraordinary scene in Victorian Parliament as the pokies lobby had another win.

Stephen Mayne — Journalist and Founder

Stephen Mayne

Journalist and Founder

After a four-hour debate in the Victorian upper house yesterday, the two major parties united shortly after 6pm to push through legislation that will lock in $70 billion in poker machine losses through until 2042.

Back in Melbourne, after a flying visit to Manus Island, Tim Costello, Australia’s longest-serving campaigner for gambling reform, sat in the public gallery steaming, along side Anna Bardsley and Carmel Harty, two women with a lived experience of poker machine harm.

Free Trial

Proudly annoying those in power since 2000.

Sign up for a FREE 21-day trial to keep reading and get the best of Crikey straight to your inbox

By starting a free trial, you agree to accept Crikey’s terms and conditions

Topics

13 comments

Leave a comment

13 thoughts on “Mayne: major parties ram through another $70 billion in pokies losses

  1. John Newton

    No Stephen (or sub) it’s not ‘to tow the party line’ but ‘to toe the party line’

  2. leon knight

    Very disappointing from Andrews and Vic Labor (who are so good on so many other social fronts), but I can imagine the revenue from 800 bandits can offset a lot hypocrisy….

  3. michael dwyer

    State governments would have a headache replacing gambling taxes. Casino and poker machine gambling are the most addictive, but billions are lost playing tattslotto and keno. The TAB and corporate bookmakers are also contributing to state budgets. The bookmaking business must be very profitable, judging by the amount of TV advertising being aired.
    I can recall a time when there were no casinos, not all states had lotteries (Tasmania’s biggest import was postal orders from Victoria), and the only legal way to bet on racing was at a racecourse. Bingo was outlawed and raffles were strictly controlled. Apart from revenue considerations, how far should the state go to protect people from themselves?

    1. Duncan Gilbey

      The best sort of tax is a voluntary one (he quipped somewhat cynically).

      1. AR

        The stupid are every nation’s major, self replicating resource which is why they are the target of so many ‘discretionary’ taxes.
        Booze, ‘baccy, gee-gees and pasteboard – doesn’t matter, they are the major contributors.

  4. AR

    Almost as if the gaming industry said to (whichever) state government, “the first taste of gambling tax is free…”.
    After that they are hooked.

  5. Peter Wileman

    Today’s politicians always go where the money is, so no surprises here. Shame on ’em all.

  6. Lord Muck

    Wowee. A politician supporting the pokies can identify others as gambling addicts. The height of hypocrisy.

  7. Kevin_T

    Quote: “A conscience vote would have produced a very different outcome.”

    So how come Australians find it acceptable that our politicians feel it is appropriate to not vote the way they believe they *should*. Even politicians in the hyper-partisan United States of America, will cross the floor and vote against their own party when they feel that it is appropriate to do so.

  8. Alex

    While so many try to rid Australia of socially troubling pokies, the Sunshine Coast Regional Council, which seems to be dominated by LNP councillors, is pushing to build a casino in the middle of Maroochydore. They have already stuffed the place for locals but can always think of ways to make it worse- all in the name of tourism.

  9. Alex

    While so many try to rid Australia of socially troubling pokies, the Sunshine Coast Regional Council, which seems to be dominated by LNP councillors, is pushing to build a casino in the middle of Maroochydore. They have already stuffed the place for locals but can always think of ways to make it worse- all in the name of tourism.

  10. Marjorie Carless

    Should a political party be allowed to own and operate gambling premises? Should a political party be allowed to actually own anything? Surely this skews their decision making. This just defies logic. I would like to know what other entities that our political parties own or have an interest in. It defies logic.

Share this article with a friend

Just fill out the fields below and we'll send your friend a link to this article along with a message from you.

Your details

Your friend's details

Sending...