21-05-2021

Joint Select Committee Gambling Reform

Jan 23, 2012  The report of the subsequent Parliamentary Joint Select Committee on Gambling Reform, supported by its Labor but not Coalition members, endorsed mandatory pre-commitment, the new timeline and the.

  1. Banks, G. (2011). Evidence and social policy: The case of gambling. Presentation to South Australian Centre for Economic Studies, Corporate Seminar, 30 March. http://www.pc.gov.au/speeches/evidence-and-social-policy-gambling. Accessed 29 May 2011.
  2. Blaszcynski, A., & Gainsbury, S. (2011). Submission to the Joint Select Committee on Gambling Reform Inquiry into Pre-commitment Scheme. http://www.aph.gov.au/senate/committee/gamblingreform_ctte/precommitment_scheme/submissions.htm. Accessed 12 December 2011.
  3. Boatright, J. R. (2009). Rent seeking in a market with morality: Solving a puzzle about corporate social responsibility. Journal of Business Ethics,88, 541–552.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Brockway, G. (1993). Limited paternalism and the salesperson: A reconsideration. Journal of Business Ethics,12, 275–279.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Cosans, C. (2008). Does Milton Friedman support a vigorous business ethics? Journal of Business Ethics,87, 391–399.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Dworkin, G. (1971). Paternalism. In R. A. Wasserstrom (Ed.), Morality and the law (pp. 107–126). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.Google Scholar
  7. Elster, J. (1979). Ulysses and the sirens. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  8. Feinberg, J. (1971). Legal paternalism. In Rights, Justice and the Bounds of Liberty: Essays in Social Philosophy. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  9. Francis, A. (2011). Wilkie Sets Deadline for Pokies Reform Plan, 29 March. ABC Online. http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2011/03/29/3177087.htm. Accessed 29 May 2011.
  10. Friedman, M. (1970). The social responsibility of business is to increase its profits. The New York Times Magazine,33, 122–125.Google Scholar
  11. Friedman, M. (1982). Capitalism and freedom. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  12. Gillard, J., & Wilkie, A. (2010). Agreement, 2 September. http://resources.news.com.au/files/2010/09/02/1225913/448095-hs-news-file-gillard-wilkie-agreement.pdf. Accessed 29 August 2011.
  13. Hart, H. L. A. (1963). Law, liberty and morality. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  14. Hing, N. (2001). Changing the odds: A study of corporate social principles and practices in addressing problem gambling. Journal of Business Ethics,33, 115–144.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Hing, N., & Mackellar, J. (2004). Challenges in responsible provision of gambling: Questions of efficacy, effectiveness and efficiency. UNLV Gaming Research and Review Journal,8, 43–58.Google Scholar
  16. Hobson, P. (1984). Another look at paternalism. Journal of Applied Philosophy,1, 293–304.Google Scholar
  17. Homer. (2001). The Odyssey (S. H. Butcher & A. Lang, Vol. XXII, Trans.) New York: The Harvard Classics, P.F. Collier & Son, 1909–14; Bartleby.Google Scholar
  18. Joint Select Committee on Gambling Reform. (2011). First report: The design and implementation of a mandatory pre-commitment system for electronic gaming machines, 6 May 2011, Parliament of Australia, Canberra. http://www.aph.gov.au/senate/committee/gamblingreform_ctte/precommitment_scheme/report/report.pdf. Accessed 29 May 2011.
  19. Kleinig, J. (1983). Paternalism. Manchester: Manchester University Press.Google Scholar
  20. Leonard, T., Goldfarb, R., & Suranovic, S. (2000). New on paternalism and public policy. Economics and Philosophy,16, 323–331.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Mele, D. (2008). Corporate social responsibility theories. In A. Crane, A. McWilliams, D. Matten, J. Moon, & D. Siegel (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of corporate social responsibility (pp. 47–82). Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Mill, J. S. [1964(1859, 1861, 1863)]. Utilitarianism, liberty, representative government. London: Everyman.Google Scholar
  23. Mond, J., Davidson, T., & McAllister, I. (2011). Public opinion poll on gambling: ANU poll, July, Australian National Institute for Public Policy and ANU College of Arts and Sciences. http://lyceum.anu.edu.au/wp-content/blogs/3/uploads//ANUpoll-%20Gambling1.pdf. Accessed 22 August 2011.
  24. New, B. (1999). Paternalism and public policy. Economics and Philosophy,15, 63–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Newell, P. (2011). National Press Club Address, 23 March. http://www.clubsnsw.com.au/Content/NavigationMenu/PolicyIssues/NationalPressClubAddress/default.htm. Accessed 2 June 2011.
  26. Nower, L., & Blaszczynski, A. (2010). Gambling motivations, money-limiting strategies, and precommitment preferences of problem versus non-problem gamblers. Journal of Gambling Studies,26, 361–372.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Productivity Commission. (1999). Australia’s Gambling Industries Inquiry Report, Canberra. http://www.pc.gov.au/projects/inquiry/gambling/docs/finalreport. Accessed 6 September 2011.
  28. Productivity Commission. (2010). Gambling, Productivity Committee Enquiry Report, vol. 1, No. 50, Canberra. http://www.pc.gov.au/projects/inquiry/gambling-2009/report. Accessed 29 August 2011.
  29. Slutske, W. S. (2006). Natural recovery and treatment-seeking in pathological gambling: Results of two U.S. National Surveys. American Journal of Psychiatry,163, 297–302.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Slutske, W. S., Zhu, G., Meier, M. H., & Martin, N. G. (2011). Disordered gambling as defined by the diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders and the south oaks gambling screen: Evidence for a common etiologic structure. Journal of Abnormal Psychology,130, 743–751.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Smith, A. [1976(1776)]. In R.H. Campbell & A.S. Skinner (Eds.), The Wealth of Nations (IV ii 9). New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  32. Suurvali, H., Hodgins, D. C., Toneatto, T., & Cunningham, J. (2008). Treatment seeking among Ontario problem gamblers: Results of a population survey. Psychiatric Services,59, 1343–1346.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Ten, C. L. (1980). Mill on liberty. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
  34. Thomas, M., & Buckmaster, L. (2010). Paternalism in social policy—When is it justifiable? Parliamentary Library Research Paper no. 8, 2010-11, 15 December, (Parliament of Australia). http://www.aph.gov.au/library/pubs/rp/2010-11/11rp08.pdf. Accessed 28 August 2011.
  35. Watts, N. (2009). Merrylands sporting and bowling submission to the Productivity Commisssion. http://www.pc.gov.au/projects/inquiry/gambling-2009/submissions. Accessed 5 September 2009.
  36. Weinstock, J., Burton, S., Rash, C. J., Moran, S., Biller, W., Krudelbach, N., et al. (2011). Predictors of engaging in problem gambling treatment: Data from the West Virginia problem gamblers help network. Psychology of Addictive Behaviors,25, 372–379.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(Redirected from Interactive Gambling Act)

The Interactive Gambling Act (IGA) was passed in June 2001 by the Australian Government with the purpose of protecting the Australian public from the detrimental effects of online gambling.

The law[edit]

The Interactive Gambling Act (2001) was passed by the Parliament of Australia on 28 June 2001.[1] It received assent on 11 July 2001.[2]

The IGA is targeted at online gambling operators and makes it an offence for them to offer ‘real-money’ online interactive gambling to residents of Australia. It also makes it illegal for online gambling operators to advertise ‘real-money’ interactive gambling services (such as online poker and casino) to Australian citizens.[3]

Accessing and using the interactive gambling services is not an offence. It is also allowed to companies based in Australia to offer their gambling services to gamblers located outside Australia with the exception of those countries that were called 'designated countries'.[4] A country can be called designated upon request of the government of this country and on condition that there is corresponding legislation in this country.[5]

Offense

  • The law applies to all interactive gambling operators whether they are Australian or foreign owned or whether they are based in Australia or offshore.[citation needed]
  • The offence of offering Interactive Gambling Services to Australian residents carries a maximum fine of $220,000 per day for individuals within an Interactive Gambling operation or $1.1 million per day for the actual company.[citation needed]
  • The responsibility of upholding the IGA is the responsibility of individual gambling operators.[citation needed] The average Australian citizen cannot be punished for signing up and gambling online.[citation needed]
Joint select committee multiemployer proposal

Reasonable diligence

An offence will not be deemed to have been committed if the online gambling operator could not, with due diligence, have known that they were offering their services to residents of Australia. The IGA defines 'reasonable diligence' in the following ways:[citation needed]

  • Whether the operator informed potential customers about the law preventing operators offering Interactive Gambling services to Australian residents.
  • Whether a customer's contracts with the online gambling operators stated that the customer could not use the service whilst physically present in Australia
  • Whether the customers had to provide personal details such as address and whether the customers' details suggested whether they were residents of Australia

Online wagering

There is some leniency in the Interactive Gambling Act that means not all online gambling was prohibited.[citation needed] For example, sports betting through licensed operators is still legal as long as the betting occurs prior to the sporting event starting[6] – this way the individual is not gambling 'interactively'. Online lotteries are also legal according to the Act, as long as they are not the 'instant-win' style scratch cards.[7]

Advertising

The IGA made it an offence to advertise an interactive gambling service or product - the advertising ban extended across all forms of media (from electronic to print).[8]

Complaints

The IGA has a formal complaints process that is managed by the Australian Broadcasting Authority in which people can register any concerns regarding the advertising of Interactive gambling products.

Act review

On 24 August 2011, the Minister for Broadband, Communications and the Digital Economy, Senator Stephen Conroy, released a discussion paper for the review of the Interactive Gambling Act 2001. The main reasons for reviewing the document are:

  • the expansion of online gambling market and the possibility of subsequent growth of problem gambling
  • the adequacy of the provisions of the Act to the emerging new technologies
  • the necessity to develop an approach to minimisation of negative aspects of online gambling
  • the necessity to analyse social, financial and jurisdictional aspects of interactive gambling services in regulated environment
  • the necessity to analyse the findings of the Joint Select Committee on Gambling Reform inquiry into interactive and online gambling and gambling advertising and the Productivity Commission Inquiry Report on Gambling

The final report has to be presented by the first half of 2012, subject to the Joint Select Committee on Gambling Reform reporting by the end of 2011.[9]

References[edit]

Joint Select Committee Multiemployer Proposal

  1. ^Interactive Gambling Act Receives Assent
  2. ^Interactive Gambling Act 2001: Compilation
  3. ^Gambling Law
  4. ^Review of the Interactive Gaming Act 2001
  5. ^Law comes into effect
  6. ^Online Gambling in Australia
  7. ^'The State of Online Play'. Retrieved 8 April 2014.
  8. ^Loeliger, Jeremy (3 July 2013). 'Advertising and promotion of gambling in sport'. Holding Redlich. Retrieved 8 April 2014.
  9. ^Terms of reference for the review

External links[edit]

Joint Select Committee On Gambling Reform

Retrieved from 'https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Interactive_Gambling_Act_2001&oldid=908770961'