The evidence is clear: mandatory pre-commitment reduces gambling harm by putting control back in the hands of players. It allows people to set their own limits in advance, deciding for themselves what they are willing to lose, and then gamble freely within those limits. For the vast majority of responsible players, nothing is taken away and there will no change to their expenditure unless they want it.
This is not a nanny-state approach and it does not remove freedoms. It strengthens personal responsibility and informed choice, while providing real protection for vulnerable people and their families. Making it universal matters, because it prevents loopholes and targeting of those most at risk.
Today the Government’s Deloitte report on into this proposed scheme was published for the first time.
The big news in the report is that Deloitte also finds massive economic benefits, including an estimated $230 million increase in Tasmania’s gross state product and 209 additional jobs under the medium scenario. This is the first time we’ve ever seen such an objective analysis.
I welcome the report and believe Tasmania should continue to progress this reform, consistent with the evidence and our past commitments. Every state and territory should do the same.
Follow this link to read the full report and form your own view.
Here are some key quotes direct from the report’s executive summary and a table from the economic analysis:
“The reforms are projected to cause a decline in activity and employment at venues, but this is more than offset by increases in activity and employment in other sectors. This trend is consistent across regions, but the magnitude is larger in regions with more EGMs”.
“While there may be a reduction in revenue for venues operating EGMs, the broader economic benefits include improved labour productivity due to reduced gambling-related absenteeism, enhanced household disposable income and reduced costs to government associated with delivery of healthcare, mental health support, homelessness programs, policing, courts, and corrections.”
“The proposed reforms are expected to lift Tasmania’s GSP and net employment, relative to the State’s economic baseline. This finding holds across each of the three scenarios.”
“The social outcomes of the reform are anticipated to be largely positive; an effectual consequence of the reform considering gambling related harm is not confined to problem gamblers. Firstly, the study shows that a meaningful reduction in gambling-related harm is expected, particularly among problem gamblers, moderate risk gamblers, and their communities. This reduction is then expected to lead to decreased demand for public health and social support services, decreased costs for justice and policing, improved productivity, and overall improvements in community wellbeing.”
“All industries are expected to benefit from the proposed reforms, with the exception of the EGM sector and the hospitality sector. In each scenario, higher economic activity stems from a combination of more available workers at higher productivity levels, due to a reduction in gambling among the workforce, and the substitution of EGM spending for consumption of other goods and services.”
All Tasmanian LGAs are expected to experience a neutral or positive deviation in gross regional product (GRP) as a result of the proposed reforms. The impacts are not uniformly distributed, with larger spending regions that have labour-intensive industries and a more diverse economic structure expected to receive the greatest economic uplift.”
“Launceston, Hobart and Glenorchy are expected to experience the greatest deviation in GRP, primarily attributable to their comparatively larger economies. The impact on smaller LGAs is expected to vary based on local factors, but none experience a net economic loss.”
