Australia’s gambling harm is likely underreported – and authorities are still failing to act
- Written by Angela Rintoul, Principal Research Fellow - Gambling and Suicide, The University of Melbourne
Monday night’s ABC Four Corners’ investigation[1] highlighted major issues with the regulation of online gambling in Australia.
Regulators are responsible for safeguarding the public from serious gambling harms. However, the investigation[2] alleged a revolving door between regulators and industry[3], the ongoing problems of donations to politicians[4] and conflicts of interest of regulators[5].
At best, weak regulation of gambling means operators’ unethical, predatory practices are overlooked. This in turn can amplify gambling harms.
It’s well known how harmful gambling can be[6] but my recent research[7] shows these harms, including suicide, have been systematically underreported.
Australians are the worst gamblers
Australians are the biggest (or worst) gamblers in the world per capita[8]. And the problem appears to be getting worse: we recorded the largest gambling losses ever[9] in 2024 (A$32 billion).
Read more: The biggest losers: how Australians became the world's most enthusiastic gamblers[10]
The gambling ecosystem benefits greatly from addicted consumers[11] to sustain and grow its revenue streams.
Operators often promote and provide inducements to their most vulnerable customers[12].
The pokie problem
Electronic gaming machines (colloquially known as pokies) are the most harmful form of gambling[13] in Australia.
It has been more than 15 years since the Australian government’s Productivity Commission recommended[14] mandatory pre-commitment for pokies.
These pre-commitment systems[15] would require users to register for an account linked to a gambling card, which would record a limit of how much they are prepared to lose.
Despite the Productivity Commission’s recommendation, no jurisdiction in Australia operates a pre-commitment system.
This is despite repeated promises from state governments, including Tasmania[16], Victoria[17] and New South Wales[18].
Gambling harms tend to publicly emerge when there is a paper trail, such as a wagering account statement. But when people use pokies, there is no paper trail because few venues require account registrations.
The industry has successfully, and fiercely, resisted a pre-comittment system[19] for pokies gambling.
While gambling operators claim to adhere to codes of conduct that should protect their patrons from harm, the reality is a different story[20].
The problem may be worse than we thought
We’ve only recently begun to understand the extent and range of harms[21] linked to gambling, including suicide.
Our 2023 study, using the best available data, found at least 4.2% of all Victorian suicides in 2009–16 were gambling related[22]. This figure includes 184 people where death investigators documented evidence of direct gambling harm and 17 others who experienced gambling harm via their partners.
Yet these figures are likely to be an underestimate, given the lack of systematic investigation. Gambling harm is almost certainly underreported.
Our new research[23] outlines the systems, practices and pathways through which the gambling ecosystem drives harm[24], including suicidality (suicidal thoughts, plans or attempts[25]) and suicide.
The gambling ecosystem – entities that derive financial benefits from gambling, including gambling operators, sporting leagues and broadcasters – use the “responsible gambling” trope to argue “flawed consumers” are responsible for gambling harm[26].
This generates stigma and shame by implying the blame for gambling harm is so-called “problem gamblers”, not the products they use.
Shame and stigma[27] are known mechanisms[28] in the relationship between gambling and suicide.
Yet our current gambling arrangements often stigmatise[29] those struggling with gambling issues[30], distracting from the practices of the commercial entities that drive the harm[31].
Our research suggests several ways governments can counteract these drivers.
This includes addressing the cosy relationship between parliament and industry, banning political donations from betting companies, ensuring people who gamble have access to systems to help them limit losses, and regulators that are resourced to enforce duty of care obligations.
Our leaders need to act
Australia’s gambling ecosystem benefits from the fragmentation of oversight, with the states currently charged with regulating poker machines.
The federal government accepts responsibility for online wagering but it does not regulate it.
Shifting responsibility between federal and state governments on gambling needs to stop. We need a national regulator that is properly resourced to monitor the practices of all gambling operators.
It has been more than two years since the Australian government’s Parliamentary Committee[32] into online gambling harm released its 31 recommendations[33] to prevent harms.
Convention dictates government should respond within six months. As MP Andrew Wilkie suggested in the Four Corners program, government inaction starts to look a lot like a protection racket for the gambling industry.
The severity of harms we now know are linked to gambling should compel the government to enact serious reforms. We know gambling, like tobacco, is leading to preventable deaths[34].
Waiting to adopt key recommendations is costing lives.
If this article has raised issues for you, or if you’re concerned about someone you know, call Lifeline on 13 11 14.
References
- ^ ABC Four Corners’ investigation (www.abc.net.au)
- ^ However, the investigation (www.abc.net.au)
- ^ regulators and industry (www.phrp.com.au)
- ^ donations to politicians (doi.org)
- ^ conflicts of interest of regulators (www.abc.net.au)
- ^ harmful gambling can be (aifs.gov.au)
- ^ my recent research (doi.org)
- ^ gamblers in the world per capita (www.theguardian.com)
- ^ largest gambling losses ever (www.qgso.qld.gov.au)
- ^ The biggest losers: how Australians became the world's most enthusiastic gamblers (theconversation.com)
- ^ addicted consumers (doi.org)
- ^ to their most vulnerable customers (doi.org)
- ^ the most harmful form of gambling (doi.org)
- ^ Productivity Commission recommended (www.pc.gov.au)
- ^ pre-commitment systems (theconversation.com)
- ^ Tasmania (www.abc.net.au)
- ^ Victoria (www.abc.net.au)
- ^ New South Wales (www.theguardian.com)
- ^ resisted a pre-comittment system (insidestory.org.au)
- ^ reality is a different story (doi.org)
- ^ extent and range of harms (www.thelancet.com)
- ^ were gambling related (www.thelancet.com)
- ^ new research (doi.org)
- ^ the gambling ecosystem drives harm (doi.org)
- ^ suicidal thoughts, plans or attempts (toolkit.lifeline.org.au)
- ^ are responsible for gambling harm (doi.org)
- ^ stigma (doi.org)
- ^ known mechanisms (doi.org)
- ^ stigmatise (doi.org)
- ^ struggling with gambling issues (www.thelancet.com)
- ^ that drive the harm (doi.org)
- ^ Australian government’s Parliamentary Committee (www.aph.gov.au)
- ^ 31 recommendations (www.aph.gov.au)
- ^ is leading to preventable deaths (www.thelancet.com)
Authors: Angela Rintoul, Principal Research Fellow - Gambling and Suicide, The University of Melbourne
