Poker Machine Princes Dealt Another Winning Hand

Australia -- IF YOU want to know why NSW clubs and pubs are so fond of the Iemma Government, have a look at the inquiry under way into the law that regulates their poker machine business.

That inquiry is into the Gaming Machines Act of 2001, the law passed by the NSW Parliament in a belated attempt to put a brake on the never-ending growth of poker machine numbers and provide a hint of protection for those people who can't stop pouring their pay into the slots.

It began this year and submissions closed in July. Sixty-five of them were received by the Office of Liquor, Gaming and Racing. None of them is public thanks. The reason for that is due to this absurd line in the discussion paper inviting submissions: "All submissions will be held in confidence unless specific permission to release a submission is given by the person or body making the submission.''

So here we have an inquiry likely to lead to the biggest shake-up of poker machine laws for a decade or more and the submissions are all secret.

Why was that clause included? The Minister for Liquor, Gaming and Racing, Graham West, immediately ducked for cover when that question was asked of his office. This, he said, was a matter for his department.

A spokesman for the department, Mark Nolan, took some time to find an explanation why confidentiality was offered when there is such strong public interest in debating the arguments. "It was standard procedure for this type of review,'' he said.

By offering to keep all submissions secret "a thorough review could take place'' and parties could make "full and frank submissions''. What tosh.

He said some submissions, where authors agree, may be posted on the internet in coming weeks. But not the only two that really count. They're the big ones: the submissions from the operators of the machines themselves.

Clubs NSW and the NSW branch of the Australian Hotels Association have deemed their submissions will not be released.

Here are the reasons that the Clubs NSW spokesman, Jeremy Bath, offered for keeping their submission secret.

'We were given the opportunity to keep it confidential ... It's not about not wanting to share, the opportunity was there.'' Mr Bath said Clubs NSW had nothing to hide, but he made it clear Clubs NSW does not believe there should be a public debate about any aspect of the law, whether it's increasing the number of machines, extending their hours of operation or whacking them in shopping centres.

"I think what the community need to see is what the Government decision is.''
And if Graham West had said all submissions would be made public, would NSW Clubs have still lodged their submission?
``Of course we would,'' he said.

The NSW Australian Hotels Association's spokeswoman had a similar line.
"It's our rsponsibility to protect our members and that's why our submission is strictly confidential," she said.

The big issue for the pubs is whether they can increase the cap which pegs the numbers of pokies in each hotel at 30. Everyone in the industry reckons pubs want that cap increased by 10, but this is a highly contentious issue. The easiest way for them to avoid a bruising public debate was always to keep their true position, and their arguments, secret which is why they're so chuffed with this secret inquiry.

No one in the Government has offered a serious argument for keeping submissions confidential.

The caps on poker machine numbers are only part of it. It also will decide whether the regulations should be simplified to make it easier for operators, whether the laws need changing to allow for further development of the industry and whether the rules on responsible conduct in relation to gambling should be changed.

These are big issues involving big money and serious consequences for the community. It's hard to think of an inquiry where there is such public interest in knowing what each player is lobbying for.

If Graham West had a hint of spine, he would ensure all submissions were made public. And he would do so now before his department recommends changes to the law, not after.

Matthew Moore Sydney Morning Herald

News Added: 03 October, 2007

Number of views : 842