GOOD BET TO HIT POKIES
PUNDITS are tipping the next federal election will be brought forward with Prime Minister Scott Morrison likely keen to capitalise on recent trends indicating that the coronavirus crisis has voters more likely to back incumbents.
So the next question for Tasmanians is when Premier Peter Gutwein will return our state to the polls.
The next Tasmanian election must be held by May 2022 but given the wave of popularity Mr Gutwein is riding because of strong leadership during the pandemic, he’d have to be tempted to go early.
Yet all the noises coming from the government seem to indicate a determination to actually get some work done before any election. Mr Gutwein wants to have the voluntary assisted dying legislation dealt with and has suggested a keenness to tackle electoral reform and land tax. Yesterday Finance Minister Michael Ferguson revealed the government would get back to implementing its controversial poker machine reforms.
It’s been nearly a year since we reported details of the State Government’s Future of Gaming in Tasmania consultation paper.
Mr Ferguson said the pandemic put the matter on ice temporarily but that given it was a key election commitment, it would be moved through parliament.
A big part of the reforms include an intention to break up the monopoly that has allowed the Federal Group to be Tasmania’s sole licence holder for casinos, electronic gaming machines and Keno.
Poker machine numbers would be capped in Tasmania at 2350, with current caps of 30 for a hotel and 40 for a club remaining. There would also be two new high-roller casino licences issued, one for Mona founder David Walsh.
To be fair, it’s exactly the policy the Liberal Party took to the last election.
But it’s worth remembering, polling a week out from the election showed that most of those surveyed preferred Labor’s plans to remove pokies from pubs and clubs. It’s just that only 14.3 per cent said it was the issue that would influence their vote. People tend to be pro-choice when it comes to gambling but of the belief that harm-minimisation should go further. Yet such strategies are completely missing from this consultation paper, which seems to be a lost opportunity to help those who need it most. The paper says that one of its purposes is to “minimise harm caused by problem gambling” – yet the policy itself only really appears to be a way to share the spoils of the game.
Whether it’s 0.6 per cent of the population impacted by problem gambling or 60 per cent, if it was your brother, aunty or mother who was one of those addicted, you would want more done to break the cycle.
The government has the power to do better for those families, while not putting at risk the hospitality industry.