Five million gamblers in Australia are facing tighter controls to stop them getting into debt.

Almost a quarter of the population play poker machines but new restrictions are being proposed because so many people are addicted.

It is an issue which even threatens to bring a premature end to Julia Gillard's term as Prime Minister.

The 'pokies' have become an Australian tradition since they were first legalised in 1956.
Stakes can range from a single cent up to $10 (£6.56) per game, and they are the foundations on which hundreds of pubs and clubs have been built.

Almost half of all Australians are members of not-for-profit clubs so the revenue earned from the machines is poured into subsidised entertainment and sports teams.

Almost every pub and club in the land will have a room set aside for a few poker machines; some clubs have hundreds of them and look more like a casino than a place to have a drink with mates.

The pokies generate £8bn a year in revenue; an average club relies on them for two thirds of its earnings. Around £600m is handed over to federal and state governments in taxes.

But inevitably, the widespread availability of machines makes them so popular that some people become addicted to playing, and lose much more than they can afford.

The government estimates that there are 95,000 Australians who have become problem gamblers.

Now one independent MP has gambled that there has never been a better time to do something about it.

Andrew Wilkie was elected in Tasmania and immediately became one of a handful of Independents whose support is vital in keeping Julia Gillard's minority Labour government in power.

All of them have put pressure on the Prime Minister on various issues but Mr Wilkie has chosen to make poker machines his priority.

He wants to see a compulsory system put in place in which all pokies players would have to register for a smartcard in order to play, and with which they would be able to set voluntary limits on how much they can afford to lose.

He also wants tighter restrictions on how much individuals can withdraw from bank cash machines contained within clubs.

The clubs have reacted with fury, saying the new technology would cost £2bn and would drive away casual players. They forecast that many clubs will be forced to close, throwing thousands of people out of work.

Their organisation, Clubs Australia, is now spending millions of pounds on an advertising campaign which calls the "licence to punt", "un-Australian".

The main TV advert has a script and acting which makes Neighbours seem like Shakespeare, and which doesn't feature a single shot of a poker machine; just two Aussie blokes, having a beer, and bemoaning the creeping power of government.

But the campaign is having an effect, with growing resistance to the reforms.

Their executive director, Anthony Ball, told Sky News that the clubs did have a duty of care to protect members with an addiction but that the clubs were a "responsible gambling environment".

"I think the clubs are about the safest places to gamble. I can't explain to you why poker machines are so popular. It's just part of the Australian character. We do love to punt but we also don't like to be treated as problem gamblers if we're not."

The pressure being applied on the Labour government by Mr Wilkie puts men like Ken Murray in an awkward position. He is a lifelong Labour activist and is president of the Randwick Labour Club in Sydney.

The club has 120 poker machines on the premises and he estimates that updating them all to accept the new smart cards would cost around a million pounds.

"Andrew Wilkie is trying to hold a gun to the head of the government," he said. "I think it's a disgraceful situation. I don't think Mr Wilkie appreciates what the clubs do for the community. If you go into rural areas, they revolve around the club."

Even at lunchtime on a weekday, many customers were sitting in front of a machine, tapping the buttons and defending their right to lose as much money as they wanted. Most were elderly.

Betty Barnett told Sky News she was an old woman who lived alone and playing the pokies was her social life. "I've been a Labour supporter all my life and I would be very tempted not to vote for them if they pass this legislation," she said.

Charles Donnallon, aged 88, said: "I won't have the government or anyone tell me what to do with my money. It's mine and I'll keep it that way."

And Karen Callaghan said: "Being on a disability pension I can't afford to lose it but I think, 'who cares?', it's my money and if I want to lose it, I'll lose it." And she had little sympathy with problem gamblers. "If they're weak that is their problem."

A compromise is being worked out, which may involve a phased introduction of the smart card system, and making it voluntary, but with so much at stake, nobody is betting on the outcome.

http://news.sky.com/skynews/Home/World- ... 3118?f=rss

Sounds like they need to break the state's dependence too

Whatever they do will need to be gradual I reckon...

It is all a bit nanny state, but I can understand their reasons. Though since the clubs get 2/3rds of their income that way it is important that they carry one. The clubs are a key social place and the alternative is online gambling which can be worse, as that will inevitably be credit card debt building up. Personally I think that they should give some of the tax revenue to pay for addiction treatment.

Corrected for accuracy.

I can't comment on the rural clubs where perhaps there is a good chance of benefit to the community. But in the cities a lot of people join their nearest RSL or Bowls club for cheap piss. These people don't partake in the sports or entertainment, they go as a group and so are unlikely to socialise with others. I'm sure these clubs do good services for many, but don't think that there aren't other problems brewing away from but related to the pokies.