how Albanese’s gambling rhetoric falls short
- Written by: Rohann Irving, Research Fellow, Flinders University
As a new parliamentary year resumes, politicians such as the ACT’s David Pocock have renewed their calls for legislation[1] to tackle Australia’s gambling losses[2], which are the worst in the world per capita.
When questioned about its lack of action on gambling reform, the government frequently responds with:
We have taken more action on problem gambling than any government since Federation – in history.
It’s a line[3] heard repeatedly from Prime Minister Anthony Albanese in defence of his government’s record.
But how much has actually been done? And how does this government’s gambling legislation record stack up against its predecessors?
Albanese’s efforts to curb gambling harm
When Albanese refers to the action his government has taken on gambling harm[4], two key measures are mostly mentioned.
The June 2024 credit ban[5] forbids online wagering companies from accepting credit cards and other digital currencies (like crypto) as payment methods.
But recent research[6] found the credit ban has the “least impact” among reforms on Australia’s highest-spending gamblers, with most swapping to transaction accounts following the ban.
The other key action Albanese mentions is the August 2023 introduction of BetStop[7], which allows online wagerers in Australia to add their names to a digital exclusion register.
This self-restriction from all forms of regulated online wagering is for a timeframe of the gambler’s choosing.
It’s a significant piece of legislation, with more than 32,000 Australians now registered[8].
But concerns[9] remain over its effectiveness, with active exclusions comprising less than 8% of approximately 400,000 high-risk gamblers[10].
There are also reports[11] of betting companies contacting Australians who have self-excluded via the register. In 2026, the Australian Communications and Media Authority announced[12] a further six licensed wagering providers breached BetStop rules.
Additionally, gambling researchers have criticised measures like BetStop for placing the responsibility[13] for harm reduction on people rather than the wagering industry.
Who can claim credit for BetStop?
BetStop is the centrepiece of Albanese’s ambitious case for action on gambling harm, but is this a fair claim?
The Coalition government under then-Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull initiated the 2015 review of illegal offshore wagering[14], which led to the eventual launch of the National Consumer Protection Framework for Online Wagering[15] under the Morrison government in late 2018.
BetStop is the last of ten harm-reduction measures designed and implemented as part of this framework[16], delivered in stages from 2018 to 2024.
Among these were new gambling advertising taglines such as “chances are you’re about to lose[17]” and prohibition of betting companies offering lines of credit to consumers.
BetStop was launched a year after the incumbent Coalition government was defeated by Albanese’s Labor. But along with the wider National Consumer Protection Framework, it was designed and scheduled by former governments.
These are matters of timing rather than Labor initiative.
What have other governments done?
Even if BetStop was a solely Albanese/Labor-led initiative, the claim that this government has done more than any other in addressing gambling harm remains shaky.
In the past decade, the Coalition government made wagering providers offer deposit limits to customers and mandated more stringent customer verification processes[18], among a suite of other measures.
In 2013, the Julia Gillard-led Labor government banned the promotion of live betting odds[19] on television and prohibited in-play generic gambling advertising for sports broadcasts.
Gambling ads, though, were allowed in breaks in play and either side of matches.
Gillard also came close to introducing mandatory pre-commitment[20] at poker machine venues but eventually backed down[21], blaming lack of parliamentary support.
Looking further back, several state governments passed significant legislation in the early 20th century.
A series of reforms[22] in the early 1900s restricted most legal betting to racecourses and sports grounds and imposed new age restrictions on gambling.
But since those pre-digital times, gambling in Australia has exploded, with most governments having done relatively little in tackling gambling harm.
The claim Albanese’s reforms are more significant than any others is a weak one, given so little has been done at federal level.
A way forward
Omnipresent advertising by online sport gambling companies and cross-border gambling flows have placed the federal government under increasing pressure to combat Australia’s chronic gambling habit.
In June 2023, the Labor government was handed a prime opportunity to cement its legacy in tackling gambling harm.
“You win some, you lose more[23]” – the report of an inquiry into online wagering led by Labor’s late Peta Murphy – contained 31 cross-party supported recommendations.
The report’s most conspicuous proposal was a phased, complete ban on online wagering advertising.
But widespread political and popular support has come a distant second to the influence[24] of professional sports, commercial television companies and gambling corporations[25].
A diversionary tactic of industry body Responsible Wagering Australia is to refocus the collective gaze onto illegal offshore bookmakers[26].
Meanwhile, ALP backbenchers[27], party members and independent parliamentarians[28] are loudly demanding meaningful action on gambling harm.
The impetus will have to come from them.
More than two years since former Opposition Leader Peter Dutton called aggressively[29] for banning wagering ads during sporting broadcasts, and the Coalition’s inquiry members supporting the Murphy report’s recommendations, the Coalition has gone quiet[30] on the subject.
Despite frequent promises[31] that a full response to the Murphy report and ensuing action were imminent, Albanese continues to stall.
With each day he delays, his claim to unprecedented gambling reform looks increasingly disingenuous and overly influenced by vested interests.
References
- ^ have renewed their calls for legislation (www.facebook.com)
- ^ gambling losses (theconversation.com)
- ^ a line (www.pm.gov.au)
- ^ gambling harm (responsiblegambling.vic.gov.au)
- ^ credit ban (www.acma.gov.au)
- ^ recent research (www.theguardian.com)
- ^ BetStop (www.betstop.gov.au)
- ^ 32,000 Australians now registered (www.acma.gov.au)
- ^ concerns (www.abc.net.au)
- ^ less than 8% of approximately 400,000 high-risk gamblers (aifs.gov.au)
- ^ reports (www.abc.net.au)
- ^ Australian Communications and Media Authority announced (www.acma.gov.au)
- ^ placing the responsibility (grattan.edu.au)
- ^ illegal offshore wagering (www.dss.gov.au)
- ^ National Consumer Protection Framework for Online Wagering (www.aph.gov.au)
- ^ framework (www.dss.gov.au)
- ^ chances are you’re about to lose (www.abc.net.au)
- ^ customer verification processes (www.dss.gov.au)
- ^ banned the promotion of live betting odds (pmtranscripts.pmc.gov.au)
- ^ mandatory pre-commitment (intouchpublichealth.net.au)
- ^ backed down (www.abc.net.au)
- ^ series of reforms (catalogue.nla.gov.au)
- ^ You win some, you lose more (parlinfo.aph.gov.au)
- ^ influence (theconversation.com)
- ^ gambling corporations (www.abc.net.au)
- ^ illegal offshore bookmakers (responsiblewagering.com.au)
- ^ ALP backbenchers (www.abc.net.au)
- ^ independent parliamentarians (theconversation.com)
- ^ Peter Dutton called aggressively (www.theguardian.com)
- ^ gone quiet (www.aph.gov.au)
- ^ frequent promises (www.theguardian.com)
Authors: Rohann Irving, Research Fellow, Flinders University
