Thursday, 30 May 2024

Bills

Victorian Responsible Gambling Foundation Repeal and Advisory Councils Bill 2024

Second reading

Debate resumed on motion of Melissa Horne:

That this bill be now read a second time.

Danny O’BRIEN (Gippsland South) (10:07): I am pleased to kick off on the Victorian Responsible Gambling Foundation Repeal and Advisory Councils Bill 2024, which is a rather curious piece of legislation, if I may say, in many respects, and I will come to some of the detail of that as I go through my contribution today. The government has made the decision to repeal the Victorian Responsible Gambling Foundation, and it effectively did that in the budget last year.

To go to a little bit of background, the Victorian Responsible Gambling Foundation was established in 2011 under the then Liberals and Nationals government by my colleague the member for Malvern, and its role was to undertake a number of things. It was to look at prevention of gambling harm and promotion of the risks of gambling harm and to undertake research in particular into gambling harm and how it can best be avoided. As the member for Malvern reminded me this morning, it was modelled on the VicHealth model, which was set up in the 1980s, as members would be aware, for a range of reasons but one of them being to ensure that the government of the day had access to alternative voices and that there was to at least some degree a bipartisan approach to health promotion and ill health prevention in Victoria. The VRGF was set up to effectively do the same sort of thing but with respect to gambling and prevention of gambling harm.

As I said, that has been a bipartisan position up until now. I think three members of Parliament have been on the VRGF since it was established, and it has done an admirable job in ensuring that there is promotion of the ills of letting gambling get control of your life, in undertaking research and in helping those, through particularly the Gambler’s Help program and its various subcontractors, who are experiencing gambling harm. Indeed the VRGF categorises gambling harm into seven forms, being financial harm; relationship disruption, conflict or breakdown; emotional or psychological distress; decrements to health, which is an interesting term – obviously impacts on your personal health; cultural harm; reduced work or study performance; and criminal activity. There is no doubt that there is significant harm caused by gambling in all forms in Victoria, whether that is through electronic gaming machines (EGM); punting on horse, dog or harness racing; sports betting, which has become an increasingly prevalent issue, particularly the blooming of online betting operating right around the country; or many other forms of gambling that can take hold of people’s lives.

I was pleased to be part of the Public Accounts and Estimates Committee, as I have been for a number of years now. We did a review last year of a number of Victorian Auditor-General’s Office (VAGO) reports into how the state manages gambling harm, and in that summary report of the report that PAEC produced there is some information on gambling harm that I think is interesting. It says:

A relationship between gambling and family violence has been established. Gambling can be both the impetus and the outcome of family violence. Similarly, there is a link between gambling and suicide, with a total of 184 gambling-related suicides occurring in Victoria between 2009 and 2016.

It goes on to say:

Gambling harm disproportionately affects those experiencing social and economic disadvantage, while culturally and linguistically diverse communities highlighted their unique vulnerabilities to gambling harm.

We had a number of different cultural groups come forward to that committee, and in particular I think the Australian Vietnamese Women’s Association gave some interesting evidence on the impact in that particular cultural group. The report goes on to say:

Gambling amongst young people is increasingly normalised.

We had a youth round table as part of that inquiry, and the youth round table participants shared some of their experiences. The report goes on to say:

The financial consequences of gambling can be substantial. Gambling player losses in Victoria totalled $7.5 billion in 2022–23. Losses from electronic gaming machines constitute the largest losses in Victoria but losses from online gambling are the fastest growing. The Victorian Government raised $2.5 billion from gambling taxes in 2022–23 and gambling tax revenue accounted for 7.6% of total revenue collected in the same year.

Those comments and statistics outline the significance of gambling harm in our community, but I would also add that the VRGF found in 2018–19 in a report that 0.7 per cent of adult Victorians suffered from a gambling disorder compared to 69 per cent of all Victorians participating in gambling. So the principle that has always guided me and I believe has guided the Liberals and Nationals is that we need to address issues with problem gambling and we need to minimise the harm that comes from gambling, but it is important to note that statistic of just 0.7 per cent of adult Victorians suffering from a gambling disorder, so it is a very small cohort. Most of us can go into a gaming venue, put 50 bucks in the machine, win, lose, draw, withdraw and get out and get on with our lives. Most of us can have a punt on the horses, whether it is spring carnival or whether it is others who get into it more seriously, and we can maintain our losses. But there is a very small cohort for whom gambling becomes an addiction, and it is certainly an issue that we need to be focusing our resources on.

So it was that the Liberals and Nationals were very proud to establish the VRGF in 2011. It was done for a number of reasons, as I said. It was to establish in particular a model similar to the VicHealth model. One of the issues that I have learned through the research on this particular legislation, though, of course, is that removing the research function into gambling and prevention of gambling into a statutory authority was a deliberate design of the VRGF, to take that research arm away from the department and away from the government of the day and give it an independent bent.

So VRGF funding is funnelled to multiple different researchers across the state and across the country and into different programs as to how we can prevent gambling harm. As I said, that was very deliberately done to ensure the independence of that research but also to avoid the perception of any influence, particularly from a department where it is making policy or from a government of the day that is making policy with respect to gaming.

So it is that the decision to abolish the VRGF raises some concerns for us. In particular, if I go back to the history, previously governments have funded the VRGF on a four-year cycle, so in the state budget last year when there was only one year’s funding provided for the VRGF our antenna was raised. I asked the Minister for Casino, Gaming and Liquor Regulation at the time whether the government was abolishing the VRGF, and she simply answered, ‘Well, that’s a matter for a future government decision.’ Clearly the decision had already been made at that stage and was confirmed a month or two later when the minister and the then Premier announced a full suite of measures, on 16 July, making a range of changes to gambling legislation and regulation in Victoria, including that the VRGF would be abolished.

What I am concerned about with that in particular is the justification for the abolition of the VRGF. We heard from the minister last week at PAEC that there has been considerable work put into – and we can see it in the second-reading speech – establishing a new model and that there has been lots of consultation with the sector, with the VRGF staff, with researchers and all that sort of thing. But generally when a government makes a decision to abolish an organisation or a statutory authority in particular, there is a review, there is an analysis of some description, of that or some catalyst for it to be abolished. An example in this space is the reform and the abolition of the VCGLR, the Victorian Commission for Gambling and Liquor Regulation. It was abolished in light of the Crown royal commission findings, which effectively found, if I can summarise, that it had been asleep at the wheel. So there was a very clear purpose for abolishing that commission and establishing the new Victorian Gambling and Casino Control Commission.

There has not been a similar case made for the abolition of the VRGF. There were no recommendations in the Crown royal commission about VRGF. There were no recommendations in the various VAGO reports that the VRGF had failed substantially and should be abolished or reformed. There were not even, in the review of the VAGO reports by PAEC that I mentioned earlier, any recommendations that suggested that VRGF should be abolished, although by the time its work was concluded on that report the decision had already been made. Whilst there were certainly recommendations from the Auditor-General and from PAEC about how the VRGF could do its job better, there was no recommendation to abolish it and there was no recommendation that the system was broken and the model was broken.

Last week in the Public Accounts and Estimates Committee estimates hearings I actually asked the minister. I asked on what advice or analysis that decision was made – that decision being the decision to abolish VRGF. I got a non-answer, I guess you could say. The minister responded:

As you can appreciate, the VRGF – and I really want to thank them for their work. It is an organisation that has been going for more than 12 years, but as they recognised themselves, it was originally designed to be a responsible gambling foundation, which was about providing those counselling services but also the education services and research. We have moved on in terms of how we are now looking at it and looking at it in a much more multidisciplinary way to deliver those wraparound support services.

So clearly nothing in that answer suggests there has been a review of the VRGF. I pushed the issue a bit. I said:

The question is: what advice or analysis was undertaken? Was there a review of the VRGF that indicated that it should be wound up?

The minister again responded:

There has been much work that has gone into that. It has been subject to extensive consultation with the sector, with industry and with the foundation itself.

But again the minister did not answer the question, and the question was: was a review actually undertaken? The answer is clearly no. This is one of the things that concern me in this legislation. The government has not made a case and indeed has not even attempted to make a case as to why the VRGF will be abolished.

At that point I would like to go into what this bill actually does, the bones of it. It is only quite a short bill, because it simply abolishes the Victorian Responsible Gambling Foundation Act 2011 and makes some other amendments to send some roles to the VGCCC. In place of the VRGF the government says it will direct client-facing prevention functions, including Gambler’s Help, to the Department of Health. The justification for that is that it is on the basis that there are significant comorbidities with problem gambling and that they often come with mental health issues, with alcohol and drug issues and, as I mentioned earlier, with family violence. That is true. It will send gambling harm awareness and prevention programs to the VGCCC, the Victorian Gambling and Casino Control Commission, and the policy research and evaluation functions of the VRGF will go to the Department of Justice and Community Safety (DJCS). That raises again significant concerns for me. This is effectively going back to the old model that we had before the VRGF, which led to the concerns and led to the VRGF being established.

I have had a read closely of course of the second-reading speech, and there are in fact seven times where the second-reading speech uses the words ‘integration’, ‘joined up’, ‘more integrated service’, ‘will enable better integration’, ‘improving service integration’, ‘a more holistic approach’ and ‘better coordinate services’. I put to you and to the house that going from one organisation that is responsible for all of those issues – that prevention of gambling harm, the provision of Gambler’s Help assistance to individuals, the promotion and the messaging more broadly to the community about the risk of gambling harm and those research functions that currently sit within VRGF – and sending them three ways, in no way to me and to the Liberals and Nationals suggests better integration of how we handle problem gambling.

In concert with the government’s failure to actually say or provide any evidence that the VRGF is not doing its job, that leads us to significant concerns. There are a number of these that I will now go through. I have mentioned that the government has not made the case that the VRGF has not been successful. I believe that sending these roles off in three different directions will lead to a haphazard and uncoordinated approach.

With respect to the Gambler’s Help and client-facing prevention functions being sent to the Department of Health, there are some concerns outside just what we are saying. Obviously, as the Shadow Minister for Casino, Gaming and Liquor Regulation I consulted widely with the industry, with experts and with those involved in non-government organisations trying to prevent gambling harm, and one comment I got back was from Mark Zirnsak from Uniting, who said that when those activities were previously in the Department of Health they were ‘neglected’ and may again ‘get lower priority’. That is the concern that I have. While it can be argued, as the government is arguing, that sending those health and prevention and Gambler’s Help activities to the Department of Health helps coordinate with other health issues, the reality is it is going into a department with a budget of something like $27 billion and a whole lot of problems that we already know about very widely in this state. We know that with respect to hospitals we are about to see a massive change in the way the government operates, and as a result I am very concerned that sending this activity to the Department of Health will again see it get neglected and not given the treatment that it deserves.

With respect to sending some of the roles to the VGCCC, gambling harm awareness and prevention programs will go to the VGCCC. The VGCCC is a regulator, and that is what it should be doing. The lesson that this chamber should have learned from the Crown royal commission is that a regulator has got to be focused on its job of being a regulator, whether that is of the casino, whether that is of EGM venues or of the wagering and betting system – all of those things the regulator should be focused on. It should not be focused on undertaking advertising campaigns.

The inconsistency of the argument that we are getting from the government is highlighted again in the discussion we had at PAEC last week on this issue when the government was asked about how the VGCCC will undertake its functions in doing that gambling harm prevention and promotion activity. The CEO Annette Kimmitt basically said to PAEC that we are inheriting a number of the programs, things like the Love the Game program, which has been running for some time through the VRGF, but they are going to develop a new five-year strategy. She said:

So we are going to be working together with Health –

as in the department –

with the department and the research arm of the department to develop – as soon as VRGF join us – a five-year strategy for transforming community sentiment …

She went on to say:

… we have got a great opportunity to work together with Health and with DJCS on devising a new five-year strategy with that fabulous funding that we have been given to do that.

If the VGCCC has been given this role separate to the Department of Health, and the government has made the decision to allocate it away from health and from the Department of Justice and Community Safety, why then is the organisation now starting to coordinate with them again? That would suggest that perhaps the system as it was was actually correct in the first place, because it was all held together in one statutory authority. I found that comment confusing in light of what the government is actually trying to do. On the one hand we are sending gambling harm prevention in three separate directions, and then one of those directions is coming back to the other two and saying, ‘Let’s work together.’ It is quite bizarre in that respect. We think particularly in light of the Crown royal commission that the VGCCC should be absolutely focused on regulation. It has given every indication that it is red-hot on regulating both the casino and other players in the market in Victoria, but we are concerned that it should maintain its focus as a regulator.

Sending the research function to the Department of Justice and Community Safety again raises a concern that I indicated earlier. One of the reasons that the VRGF was set up in the first place was to remove that perception, or reality, of influence over the research program by a department that is also the policymaker and by a government that is also the policymaker. That was highlighted again through our consultation on this bill. Monash University’s Dr Charles Livingstone, who also presented as a witness to the PAEC inquiry last year, said it is ‘a major concern’ that research may be bent to the ‘short-term policy interests of the department’. That I certainly agree with. That is, as I said, why the VRGF was set up in the first place, to ensure that research could operate with a bucket of money given to it by the government but at arm’s length from the government with bipartisan board members that could work on what are the really key things that need to be done without any influence from the department, without any influence from the government of the day. That is our other concern.

There are a couple more things that have raised our concern with this. The other parts of the bill are the abolition of the Responsible Gambling Ministerial Advisory Council, sometimes known as RGMAC, and the Liquor Control Advisory Council. These, I am told, have not met respectively since 2020 and 2021, but they are being abolished. They are statutory advisory bodies now, both under legislation, and they are both being abolished. The government quite openly says that they are not going to be replaced because the government wants to be flexible around stakeholder engagement to ensure it is fit for purpose for the times.

That could also be code for, ‘We’ll talk to who we want to talk to, and we won’t listen to the people that we don’t want to listen to.’ I think that the government just abolishing these organisations is consistent with what is happening in various other aspects of legislation in this Parliament at the moment, where a number of statutory advisory bodies are being abolished. One argument for that is flexibility. Another argument is, ‘We don’t want to listen to who we don’t want to listen to.’ That is a concern.

My final concern with this legislation is in respect to funding. When the bill was brought forward and the government announced the decision to give only one year’s funding to VRGF last year I did wonder whether this was in fact a financial decision. But we have seen from the budget that indeed the same amount of money – indeed a little bit more money than has been provided over four years in the past – has been allocated to these new roles, this new model that the government is establishing. I might say that the money is $165 million, allocated to the department of justice, which then somehow within the wheels of government will be reallocated to VGCCC and the Department of Health. Although the minister in PAEC last week gave a breakdown of how that will be reallocated, it is not clear to this chamber exactly how that occurs when the funding has been given to the Department of Justice and Community Safety.

Nonetheless the concern is that ultimately when the funding is not being given to a statutory authority it is going into departmental funds and will be at the whim of future departmental trimming here and there. So there is uncertainty as to whether there will be ongoing funding, as I said at the start. VRGF had always been funded in four-year blocks by both sides of politics until last year, and there is nothing in this bill or indeed in government announcements or policy announcements that would suggest that that will still be the case in four years time. My concern is that the roles become absorbed into the base funding for DJCS, for the Department of Health and potentially even for the VGCCC, and we lose firstly that transparency but particularly the prospect of the actual funding continuing. All of this raises the concern as to why we are doing this when there is no evidence that the VRGF has not been doing its job. There are concerns at least from our side as to how a new model being spread across three different organisations and departments will actually be better than having it focused in one integrated group, as it is now.

You do wonder whether perhaps this is simply a political angle, whether this is just a little bit of a political attempt by the government to trash the legacy of the former Liberals and Nationals government and remove something that we established in this space. There are hints about that. The minister’s second-reading speech says with respect to the justification for the historical structure that we have:

For example, the importance of engaging with people with lived and living experience was not considered when the Responsible Gambling Ministerial Advisory Council and Liquor Control Advisory Council were established.

Who said? Who said lived experience was not considered? That just seems to me to be a justification, and a fairly flimsy one, for abolishing those two advisory councils but also a broader question for the VRGF.

I think the fact that we are debating this legislation now also speaks to the arrogance of the government. The government has already made the decision to get rid of the VRGF. The action is in train to move staff within those three different agencies and departments that I mentioned. Funding has been allocated straight to the Department of Justice and Community Safety, but this legislation has not been passed by the Parliament and has not been approved by the people of Victoria. So I think that is very arrogant of the government to do so.

Not only the arrogance but the haphazard nature of all this I think is best exemplified by a couple of very minor matters – minor but perhaps important. I note the statement of compatibility that was tabled along with the second-reading speech for this legislation by the minister in fact calls this legislation the Gambling Legislation Amendment (Victorian Responsible Gambling Foundation Repeal and Other Matters) Bill 2024. Indeed when I sent this out to my colleagues that is the title I gave it because that was the piece of paper I had in front of me. Then when I opened the bill I found that actually it is called the Victorian Responsible Gambling Foundation Repeal and Advisory Councils Bill 2024.

So the government has got the wrong title on the statement of compatibility that goes with this legislation, which goes to the point of: who is running this show? Really, who is running this show? We do not even have consistency in the title of the bill, and that makes me think that this has been thrown together – that a decision has been made to abolish the VRGF and then they have had to come up with a model after that.

I think I could go further, because as we know, this bill abolishes the VRGF and abolishes the Responsible Gambling Ministerial Advisory Council and the Liquor Control Advisory Council and yet the bill itself is called the Victorian Responsible Gambling Foundation Repeal and Advisory Councils Bill 2024. It is my submission to you that the word ‘repeal’ in fact should go after ‘advisory councils’, which are also being repealed. Look, they are minor issues, but I know when I looked around the other side there were some furrowed brows when I raised those issues, because the members opposite thought, ‘Oh, my God, what are we dealing with here? We can’t even get the names of the bill right.’

Colin Brooks interjected.

Danny O’BRIEN: The Minister for Development Victoria at the table says he was not listening. That probably highlights the point. The government has not really been paying attention.

In summary, there are broader reforms to come. The government, when it announced the abolishment of the VRGF, made some significant changes, and I will have a lot more to say about those in the future, but we still do not have, almost a year after the government announced those changes on 16 ‍July, a timeline for when those reforms will be introduced. I asked the minister last week whether she had one, and she could not give me an answer. Indeed the technical reference group to look at the changes to the electronic gaming machines has still not even met, so one wonders what the government is doing.

But as I said, we are concerned that the government has not made the case to abolish the Victorian Responsible Gambling Foundation. It has not argued adequately as to how sending problem gambling harm in three different directions will actually help the problem gambler. We can only assume that this is indeed a political decision, one perhaps driven by something internal, and we do not really know what it might be. But as a result the Liberals and Nationals will not be supporting this bill; indeed we will be opposing it. We do not think it delivers the response to gambling harm that we need here in this state.

Michaela SETTLE (Eureka) (10:37): I rise to speak on this very important bill. As many in the house know, I am one of those people who have been significantly impacted by gambling harm, and I speak every time on our gambling bills because reducing stigma remains the most important thing that I can offer in this place so that people understand the reality. I am deeply saddened to hear that the opposition will not be supporting this bill. As someone who has lived through significant gambling harm and needed those services and needed those supports, I think that this government and our minister have done me incredibly proud in the work that they have done in the reform space. We have not seen reform like this for many, many years.

I am, as I said, very saddened to hear that the other side will not support this bill. I was a little bit distressed to hear that the semantics and labels of bills seemed to matter more to the other side than the families and the people that are going through these very difficult times. The name of the bill to me is less important than the focus on those communities. Within his opening address the member for Gippsland South did acknowledge, I think his words were, ‘the blooming of online betting’, and I think it is important to understand that a government needs to continue to address an issue like this as it evolves. I know the Deputy Speaker himself has an interest in many of the ways that that has evolved in gaming and so forth. These reforms – we cannot sit on our hands and just leave the legislation as it is. We need to be active and proactive in this space.

I find particularly offensive the suggestion that these reforms are in any way politically motivated. I can assure you that I have met with the minister on many, many occasions and her deep commitment to addressing gambling harm is there and across government. Many things have been raised as issues: they said that there is a fundamental misunderstanding about what integrated services are all about. We know that comorbidity is a feature of gambling harm, so 30 per cent of people that present with mental health or AOD issues also have a gambling issue. When we talk about ‘integrated’, it is about making sure that we can support and find those people across all of the services. Indeed I was delighted to have funded a program which looked at how we can better have primary caregivers identify some of those issues.

The most extraordinary line I think that came from the member for Gippsland South in this debate was to suggest that that there was no evidence that it was not doing its job. That is a fairly extraordinary statement given what the Victorian Auditor-General’s Office report found, and I do remember when I read the VAGO report being very distressed reading that. In fact it was really about getting the money out there, that there was no research done on the impacts. If that is not a failure of you doing your job ‍– to not actually work out whether those systems and those programs are working or not working – that would seem to me to be a fundamental failure in the system. The member for Gippsland South suggested that there had been no review done on the repeal of the Victorian Responsible Gambling Foundation (VRGF), but I would put to him that a VAGO report from our Auditor-General is a pretty serious review to be put through and then indeed to be followed up by the Public Accounts and Estimates Committee. One of the things that came out of the PAEC review was that of the eight recommendations put by VAGO, only one of those recommendations had been instituted. After the VAGO report we had another review by PAEC, and PAEC found that indeed only one recommendation had been addressed. I would say that that is a fairly serious review process, which said that it was not functioning.

I do want to give a shout-out to the VRGF. It did have its place, but its anachronism is in its very name. The responsible gambling foundation is not appropriate in these times. It is a victim-blaming term to talk about ‘responsible gambling’. It suggests that people that are in the grip of addiction are in some way irresponsible. The very name of the foundation speaks to the time it was established and the way that we viewed gambling in those days. It is important that we continue to move and to develop systems that will address the new and emerging issues in the gambling frame, like online gambling.

One of the other objections that came from the other side, and why they will not support a bill to assist gambling families, was in relation to the research. It is understanding that the research needs to be across a range of portfolios, again because we have the comorbidities. I would also like to point out that one of the findings from the VAGO report was that the VRGF were not even using their own research in the development of their programs. So I ask those on the other side to consider whether they really do think that that research process was working under the VRGF. Certainly PAEC found that indeed it was not working.

With regard to the funding issues, which the member spoke about, it will be first dibs of the hypothecated account, which is a community fund, which will always go to gambling. I know that the development programs will continue to be funded throughout, so we have guaranteed the rest of them for three years.

I can assure you that the commitment of this minister, me and this government will always be to support gamblers and their families. Let us not forget how many families and people are impacted. Those on the other side might seek to minimise this and tell us that it is just 0.7 per cent. I would say two things to you, having been one of those 0.7 per cent. It is not a light or insignificant thing. The trauma that has gone through my family, my children – it was last night I spoke to my 22-year-old son, and he was still trying to work his way through the impact that my ex-husband’s gambling had on our family. So you might like to diminish 0.7, but I stand in support of that 0.7.

I would also ask you to consider that one in five people are at risk of gambling harm. I was meeting with Child and Family Services Ballarat, a wonderful support service in Ballarat, just the other day with a woman called Jo, who delivers into schools, and she was describing the difficulties of getting kids to understand in this day and age what gambling is. We have such a gaming community that then can so easily develop into gambling, and that was her important role there. So while those on the other side might think that 0.7 per cent of people are not worth looking after, I do, and I certainly do the one in five –

Danny O’Brien: On a point of order, Deputy Speaker, on the question of debating the issue, nowhere did I diminish the fact there were 0.7 per cent of people. I did not diminish the people involved; I said it was a very small group.

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Member for Gippsland South, I can rule on the point of order. It is not a point of order; it is a matter for debate.

Michaela SETTLE: And I find it offensive to have my family relegated to a small group. Without question this government has worked long and hard in these gambling reforms, and I have stood by and am very proud of what our minister has delivered. We have already seen a tranche go through Parliament. That saw some really important reforms around the times that venues could open. Finally, with response to the Victorian Gambling and Casino Control Commission being involved, I would like to point out that that is with industry. I commend this bill.

Tim McCURDY (Ovens Valley) (10:47): I am delighted to rise and make a few comments on the Victorian Responsible Gambling Foundation bill. It is actually called the Victorian Responsible Gambling Foundation Repeal and Advisory Councils Bill 2024, and when I say ‘delighted to rise’ I am disappointed that they are repealing this act, because we know Labor cannot manage money and Victorians are paying the price. Getting rid of the VRGF, the Victorian Responsible Gambling Foundation, is just yet another example of cutting and running from some of the services that we need here in Victoria, particularly for the vulnerable and those who have gambling problems.

I note the member for Eureka told her personal stories, and I respect those stories, but at the same time we need to continue to support people with gambling problems. I think the Victorian Responsible Gambling Foundation was the ideal service, the ideal mode, to make sure that those services actually made it to the ground. We talk about waste and mismanagement by this government and the way that debt is going up. Something has to give. They will not stop building tunnels and they will not stop overpaying contractors, but ‘Let’s tighten the belt for average Victorians and let’s cut and run from some of the services and make vulnerable Victorians even more vulnerable.’

The VRGF has been in place since 2011. I was pleased to be on that board for over 10 years, and we oversaw the strategic direction of the VRGF and we crosschecked many of the programs and understood the services that they were delivering. I think the VRGF did an enormous job in supporting people with gambling problems. There is no doubt that the results were achieved and that it helped people. It was a backstop for people with gambling problems. The member for Malvern put this in place. It was funded at the rate of $150 million over a four-year term – $37.5 million a year. When you look at the gambling revenue in Victoria – I think the member for Gippsland South said it is $2.5 billion a year in revenue – $37.5 million a year on the VRGF is a drop in the ocean in terms of being able to fund it and support that small part of the population who do have gambling problems. I think this bill repealing the Victorian Responsible Gambling Foundation is a poor move, and I am just disappointed that they have chosen to go this way.

We know that there are plenty of ways to have a punt in Victoria, whether it is on the horses, the dogs, the harness, the pokies or even Crown, and we have seen that revenue stream. It is substantial, and I say I am more than happy for gambling to continue in Victoria. I love a punt myself; many do. Whether it is at spring carnival or whether it is on a Saturday on the horses or whatever it might be, we enjoy a punt. It is legal, it is a way of life and it is a great industry that, with the food and beverage industry, is a great way for people to enjoy a lifestyle. But there are some who do not handle it well, so for Pete’s sake we need to have those safety harnesses in place, and the Victorian Responsible Gambling Foundation was one of those harnesses. We need that wraparound support for problem gamblers, because we know behind every problem gambler there is a family, and that family will suffer from the financial stress and other stresses that go with problem gambling. So I think we should be investing more in supporting those people rather than taking money out of the Victorian Responsible Gambling Foundation.

To be honest, we just do not trust this government. We have seen before that they will say, ‘We’re changing the name. We’re going to make these changes. We’re going to do this, we’re going to do that.’ Let us just watch this space. Two or three years down the track that $37.5 million or $150 million over four years will get withered away before we know it, and it will be interesting to see what happens with the number of problem gamblers. I hope it does not go up, but at the same time, if we are going to withdraw funds, I think that we need to keep an eye on what that figure is, because it could go up without the support that we currently get, and with the government wielding the axe on programs like this we will all pay the price somewhere down the track.

Problem gambling leads to many other problems, as we know. Sometimes it is crime, sometimes it is substance abuse, and it has other effects on families of course – financial concerns – and life goes off track. The VRGF prides itself on early intervention and certainly providing assistance to those in troubled times, and now that rug is being pulled out from underneath them.

The gambling revenue, as I said before – $2.5 billion – is massive. With what we have got nowadays on our phones and our iPads, whether it is an app from Neds, Sportsbet, TAB, Ladbrokes or Bet365, there are just so many opportunities now to be betting or gambling. Problem gambling can only go up with the amount of people that have easy access to it. Once upon a time, we all know, you had to go to the TAB and fill out a ticket to have a punt. Nowadays it can happen at any given time on any given day. So instead of taking funds out of problem gambling services we need to invest more and more.

The government cannot compete with the amount of ads that are on TV encouraging people to have a punt, encouraging people to download an app. Whether it is in the newspaper, whether it is on Facebook or however that is, the government cannot compete. So the best thing we can do is, through the VRGF, make sure we have programs in place and support programs and design ads and other ways to make people think about their gambling situation and decide whether it is the right thing for them.

We used to talk as board members about needing more dollars, not less. We need more programs, more advertising messages and more help, but what is happening now is, as I said, pulling the rug out from under problem gamblers. I think it is going to do more harm than good. Just sending people to a helpline is not always the answer. Sometimes it is those messages. We produce those ads that talk about problem gambling. We see ads that show people standing in the supermarket with no money left in the account because somebody has used it for gambling. Those ads really hit home to some families and sometimes shame gamblers into thinking about what they have been doing, playing that guilt card, and force gamblers to consider their families.

Without the VRGF, who will take responsibility to oversee the big picture and make sure that the battler and the person with a gambling problem is looked after? As I say, the member for Malvern, who is in the chamber now, put this together – the VRGF – back in 2011, and I think it has been very successful. Sometimes I wonder – because it was not Labor’s idea, I am surprised that it lasted as long as it did. Because it is not their idea, it cannot be any good. We have managed to hang in there for 10 ‍years under Labor, but now, as I say, time is up, and they are going to move on from it. I know the member for Gippsland South as the Shadow Minister for Casino, Gaming and Liquor Regulation will certainly keep his finger on the pulse in terms of the number of problem gamblers, and whether that goes up or down. We certainly do not want it to go up; do not get me wrong for a moment. But when you take services away from vulnerable people, there is every chance that those numbers will increase.

I suspect some families who are victims, and we have heard from some of those in the chamber today, people who have had family members with gambling problems – although they stand there on that side of the chamber and say, ‘We’re helping; we’re not taking things away, we’re just changing things.’ Well, as I say, we do not trust the government. A change usually means a budget cut. It means money is leaving the services for problem gamblers. I think that we need to keep our eye on where this goes, because over time there is more and more gambling occurring because of the devices that we all carry, the apps and how easy it is to gamble. As I say, I have nothing against people having a punt – I think it is ideal; I think it is terrific. But for those with a problem, we need to make sure those services are in place, and as I said, the VRGF did that very well. We invested heavily. We could have invested more, but we did invest heavily in good, strong advertisements and sometimes playing that guilt card, as I said, to make sure problem gamblers start to have a look at themselves and think about their families. I just hope that as we move forward there are other systems in place. We often hear that there will be systems, but the proof will be in the pudding, and I certainly hope that is the case.

Gary MAAS (Narre Warren South) (10:58): I too rise to make a contribution on the Victorian Responsible Gambling Foundation Repeal and Advisory Councils Bill 2024, and I do, at the outset, acknowledge the contribution of my colleague and my good friend the member for Eureka. People who come to our chamber and who speak so meaningfully and so poignantly from a place of lived experience, regardless of what side of the chamber they are on, will always have my deepest and my utmost respect. It was very, very difficult for the member for Eureka to be able to put her points forward, but can I just say that the member for Eureka has been putting these points forward since the very beginning of her term in the 59th Parliament. It was a part of her inaugural speech. I have been in solidarity all the way with the member for Eureka when it comes to gambling reform in this state, but when you go back some six years ago, can I just say that there has been some significant reform in the state – some really significant reform.

The member for Eureka spoke about how she hops up on her feet each and every single time some reform around gambling in this state has come about. I can tell you, because I keep a very, very watchful eye when it comes to gambling reform in this state, that she would have popped up on her feet some seven times in fact. Most of those times when reform is being put forward it is opposed by the opposition, even in the face of excellent groups like the Alliance for Gambling Reform, who are supportive of these changes that we are putting through.

I am very supportive also of the work that the Alliance for Gambling Reform do, because a long time ago they recognised that gambling, firstly, disproportionately affects people in lower socio-economic communities, like those in Cranbourne, like those in Narre Warren South. But they also recognised that it is a public health issue, and when it is a public health issue you have got to find the areas of the public service that are just going to best be able to address that. They have long been advocates for public health reforms that are evidence-based but also community-based, and their sole purpose, their sole reason for being – I almost went the French version then – is to reduce and to prevent gambling harm. Lock, stock and barrel, this government has been only ever putting reforms forward, particularly since the beginning of the 59th Parliament, to ensure that we get to that place. There was a press release that came from the Alliance for Gambling Reform this morning that said they are supportive of this bill. Of course they are saying that more can be done, and I think those of us who want to see gambling harm reform continue, again, are very supportive of that notion. But they do acknowledge the significance of this bill, and they acknowledge the good that it is doing and that it builds a further foundation of work that can be done.

The bill itself will improve the public health approach to gambling harm by implementing the new gambling harm prevention and response model, and it aims to improve on the model of the Victorian Responsible Gambling Foundation. It will do so by creating better connections between gambling health services, harm research and prevention and other coexisting conditions experienced by people with lived or living experience of gambling harm. The amendment aims to improve on prevention and response and gambling harm minimisation by better recognising its interwoven nature with health. The amendments in this bill improve the way gambling harm is addressed, providing an updated and matured model. It is an important step in gambling harm minimisation – an issue, as I have said, I have really advocated a very long time for. Again, I am very proud of our government for continuing to strengthen our harm minimisation reforms.

Last year I had an intern in my office, and he did a tremendous piece of work on a report into electronic gaming usage in Narre Warren South. That intern, Jack Keating, was a student from Melbourne Uni, and the report focused very heavily on electronic gaming machine usage in a suburban and socio-economic disadvantage context. The report found what we all know: there is above-average density of electronic gaming machines in my electorate in Narre Warren South, which has one of the highest annual player expenditures. I could not believe that households averaged about $1000 of gaming losses per annum – that is, each and every household, on average, in my electorate has losses of a thousand bucks per annum. The report also found high accessibility of those machines in my suburbs.

More work can be done – we know that. But the previous reforms announced by our government have ensured that the gambling industry has a much stronger oversight. Gambling reforms introduced in 2023 were a great step by the Labor government. The reforms included load-up limits reduced from $1000 to $100 and mandatory closure periods for those electronic gaming machines. I know that these reforms will impact people in a very positive way in my community of Narre Warren South. Gambling does not just hurt people’s finances, as we have heard from the member for Eureka, it can also impact their relationships, and the trauma can be long lasting. It has impacts on people’s relationships, jobs, health and wellbeing. The impact of gambling is holistic, so we need a holistic response. This new model of service delivery will retain functions from the foundation as well as address key weaknesses. Services such as therapeutic gambling counselling, community-based gambling harm prevention and the delivery of support to gaming venues will be continued, but under this bill the new model will focus on addressing the referral pathways between Gambler’s Help local services and Victoria’s other health, family violence and alcohol or drug services.

We know that gambling harm is a big issue. Whether related to their own or someone else’s gambling, more than half a million Victorians experience gambling harm each year. It is often concurrent with other factors, such as declining mental health, increased use of alcohol or drugs and higher rates of family violence. The new model, informed by stakeholder engagement, aims to integrate gambling harm into other referral pathways in health and social services. This will help to reduce the stigma around gambling and make it part of other primary care services.

People who experience gambling harm are so often those who can least afford it, and our Allan Labor government is really serious about supporting Victorians who are experiencing or are at risk of experiencing gambling harm. This year’s budget commits $165 million of funding to these functions over four years, and that is a record investment in prevention and response. We know that this is better than banning gambling altogether; that would only push gambling further underground and make it a breeding ground for organised crime. To improve outcomes for those with lived or living experience, the strengthening of oversight will increase education, support services and underpin reform to reduce gambling harm. I would like to again acknowledge the member for Eureka for her excellent contribution, and I would like to commend the bill to the house.

David SOUTHWICK (Caulfield) (11:08): I rise to make some comments on the Victorian Responsible Gambling Foundation Repeal and Advisory Councils Bill 2024 and say at the outset that we are opposing this bill. I want to acknowledge the work of the member for Gippsland South for what he has done in investigating the bill. I can say that he has done his homework, unlike those opposite, who demonstrate that this has been rushed through. We even see in the statement of compatibility that they have got the wrong title of the actual bill. This is a government that clearly never does its homework.

Members interjecting.

David SOUTHWICK: It is very easy to interject, but it never, ever does its homework. To think with an issue as important as problem gambling that they would literally just rush something through without any work, any detail. All they are going to do is cause more issues to an area that absolutely needs more focus. This side of the house very proudly has been working to help those that have issues around problem gambling and comorbidity issues surrounding problem gamblers, including drug and alcohol problems and including family violence issues. This is a major, major, major concern for our state.

I want to congratulate the member for Malvern for his work in initially establishing the Victorian Responsible Gambling Foundation when he was the Minister for Gaming. For 13 years we had the Victorian Responsible Gambling Foundation. I know the member for Ovens Valley is in the chamber as well – he and I both sat on the inaugural board along with Ian Trezise, the former member for Geelong. The three of us, in a very bipartisan way, sat on the Victorian Responsible Gambling Foundation board to make sure that problem gamblers and those issues were put first and foremost in a centralised, organised, non-bureaucratic way, led by research, focused on research and ultimately implementing policies that would make a difference.

And what does this government do? They slash and burn. That is what this government does. They say, ‘You know what, we’re not going to focus on problem gambling in this state’ – which we know is a huge issue – ‘We’re just going to take the money and throw it into a whole lot of agencies,’ so we can never again see what is actually spent in this area going forward and ultimately what work has been done.

The great benefit of the Victorian Responsible Gambling Foundation was each and every year, like every other independent group, they would have an annual report and you could look at the work that had been done. Partnerships were formed, like with the North Melbourne Football Club and other sporting organisations, that got footballers and people in different sporting codes, community clubs and multicultural groups that all had issues in their communities around problem gambling working with them and got them as spokespeople to address the situation to ensure problem gambling does not happen again.

One of the things that the member for Ovens Valley and I did in the very first period was go around and visit some of these gaming areas and see them firsthand. I will never forget going on a Friday afternoon to Crown Casino and talking to a guy that was playing blackjack and him telling me that he had just lost the weekly wage that he was meant to take home to his family on the table. He had just lost his wage, and he then had to go home and explain to his family, to his wife, what he had done. There is no question that he was one of many problem gamblers that we have in our state, and that is why it is so important that we address problem gambling. We know we have a state that has been built on the opportunity to go and have a flutter. There are many people that will go and have a flutter on the races – we have got Caulfield racetrack in my area. You have got people that will play the pokies and go to the casino. But it is very different from those people that will only lose what they set out with in their pockets – and I do stress the word ‘lose’, because I have not met too many winners other than those that enjoy a punt.

What we are really concerned about with this bill are the problem gamblers and the consequences of that. Again, we are talking a lot in this chamber, and rightfully so, about family violence. We know when people have lost their money and we know when people have a gambling problem that that leads to so many other things as well – drugs, alcohol, family violence. They are all issues that need to be addressed and focused on. The great, great benefit of the Victorian Responsible Gambling Foundation is that is what it did. The statistics over 2022–23 say that we had 36,123 problem gamblers in Victoria. This means that almost one in five, or 555,000 Victorians, who gamble may experience harm from gambling – one in five. We also know that there were 122,500 Victorians likely to have experienced harm as a result of someone else’s gambling in the preceding 12 months. That is not just the individual; there were another 122,000 people that would be directly affected by those problem gamblers.

The Victorian Responsible Gambling Foundation has provided important work, including 49,626 ‍hours of therapeutic counselling, 20,000 hours of financial counselling for problem gamblers, 10,500 calls to the Gambler’s Help line and 63,810 visits to online gambling addiction support services. These are direct services as a result of having a foundation. In addition to that, there is the important research, not led by bureaucrats but led by experts. That research is a core design feature of the foundation, taking it away from the department. By June 2023 their research reports had received more than a thousand citations, with additional publications such as journal articles arising from the foundation’s funded research cited more than 2500 times. This foundation has been cited here in Victoria, nationally and internationally for the work that they have done.

What is the government doing in this particular bill? In place of the foundation, it will look at where the money goes in direct services. It takes it away from a centralised body. It takes us away from having accountability and responsibility for that body. Despite the second-reading speech repeatedly using the word ‘integrated’, it is hard to see how a three-way split will have a concerted effort on focusing on the actual harm. That is what the Victorian Responsible Gambling Foundation was set up for: a centralised focus on harm itself. There is no clear justification for why the Victorian Responsible Gambling Foundation has been cut. There are no other words to describe it. There is no reason. They have had 13 years; they have had lots of work. The fact that they have had to rush this bill in simply shows that they have not done their homework on this. They have simply just run out of money, and as a way of running out of money they have said, ‘We’ll just literally wash the money through three other agencies.’ And you might claim that the overall money might be the same, but once you wash it through other agencies, how much is actually going to go to dealing with the problem directly? Where is the accountability? You have got a board, you have got a foundation, you have an annual report, you have the ability for them to be held accountable, you have a CEO and you have a board that actually in the past, up until now, had members of Parliament. The government may laugh and joke around and say it is crap, but the members that were on that board included Labor members. There were many Labor members on the board, who they are calling crap. Well, it is just ridiculous for you to think that your own member responsible is crap.

Paul Edbrooke: On a point of order, Acting Speaker, with respect to the member for Caulfield, he has used language that I would see as unparliamentary twice now, and he has basically made a generalisation about people on this side of the chamber that just does not exist.

The ACTING SPEAKER (Paul Hamer): There is no point of order.

David SOUTHWICK: Even the Speaker of this fine house was a member of the Victorian Responsible Gambling Foundation. We have had great members of Parliament that have been on the Victorian Responsible Gambling Foundation from all sides of Parliament – except for the Greens. I think that speaks for itself. I say that it is a real shame that something that has worked – that has made a real difference to gambling addiction – has been scrapped by the Labor Party today. It is a real shame and a real step backwards for problem gamblers here in Victoria.

Josh BULL (Sunbury) (11:18): I am pleased to have the opportunity this morning to contribute to the debate on the Victorian Responsible Gambling Foundation Repeal and Advisory Councils Bill ‍2024. Before I go to the substance of the bill before the house this morning, I do want to acknowledge the outstanding contribution made by the member for Eureka, who gave what was indeed a passionate and considered contribution, as she does across all of her contributions. For this matter in particular she has lived experience of that harm, which she has spoken about on numerous occasions within this chamber, and I commend that contribution and acknowledge just how important her lived experience is when it comes to these matters and indeed a whole range of matters that are before the house.

The other point I want to make before I go more specifically to the legislation is this notion or term of ‘problem gambler’, used so frequently by the previous speaker. I would just caution those members opposite to perhaps have a rethink about the nature of that term and to think about those people that are experiencing harm due to gambling – reframing the nature of what effectively a system can do to individuals, to families and indeed to communities. That is something that I think is at the forefront of some of the important changes that need to be made, and are being made, which indeed feed into, I think, the wider aims both of the government and of course of the legislation.

We on this side of the house are committed to a better, fairer and stronger state. We want Victorians to be able to move around local communities, to be able to spend time with family and friends and to do the things that they enjoy with a high level of health, education, transport and opportunities to socialise and enjoy those experiences as they go about their lives. But we know that gaming and gambling are an area where that critical balance needs to be struck and where we need to do everything we can to support putting in place those safeguards for those that are experiencing harm due to gambling. The government remains committed to being determined, focused and driven to support those that are experiencing gambling harm.

What is unfortunate is that we see those opposite lacking significant credibility on these issues. We know that last year in this chamber they advocated for exemptions to strong new closing time rules for poker machine venues. These amendments would have applied to a combined 731 poker machines, to almost $100 million of losses per year. This bill is about improving services for vulnerable Victorians, and it is about making sure, as I started with earlier, we are doing everything we can to reduce harm to those that, very sadly, experience many of the harms that have been canvassed by other members in their contributions and many of the areas that are problematic and more than problematic right across local communities.

It is important to go back and read the Auditor-General’s Reducing the Harm Caused by Gambling report on the responsible gambling foundation. I know that has been mentioned throughout this morning. In particular the Auditor-General concluded, contained in the report:

The Foundation does not know whether its prevention and treatment programs are effectively reducing the severity of gambling harm.

While the Foundation may help some people through its programs, it does not understand their broader impact. This is because the Foundation lacks an outcome-based framework to develop programs and measure their results.

We know that the report contained those eight recommendations directed largely at the foundation. We know by looking closely at what is in the report that those reforms, those measures and many of the changes that are contained within the legislation before the house are going to many of the issues that have been canvassed.

Many of those issues within local communities are a significant challenge and an immense concern, and they should be a concern not just to all members of this place but to everyone right across the state. What we know is that in part due to much of the research, much of the work with industry, there are serious and significant reforms that have been put in place. We know and understand, as I said earlier, that it is about striking a critical balance. It is about making sure that those who want to go and experience much of what is on offer within local communities can do so in a safe and meaningful way, knowing that the harm that exists within these practices is always there, and how we as a collective, how we as a government, can continue to work right across the state within local communities to make sure that we are supporting those who need it the most. I go back to what was said really poignantly, really passionately, by the member for Eureka, and those matters which she alluded to in her contribution are of serious concern to all of us. We know, thanks to the work of many, that this is something that has needed to be addressed for a very, very long time.

But what we cannot have and what we should never settle for is a situation where business as usual is fine. We are not a team that is focused on business as usual. We want to make sure that we are doing everything we can in every single way to support those that need it the most when in many instances they are often at the lowest point in their life. It is the responsibility of the government and it is the responsibility of all members of Parliament to ensure that we are doing that, and much of the work that is in the report is about making sure that we are supporting those that need it the most.

There have been significant reforms, particularly over the last couple of years, within this space. There has been a mountain of work to ensure that we are delivering those reforms that we committed to and those reforms that make sure we are taking an important approach to these matters. We know that the bill enhances the public health approach to gambling harm, and we know of the benefits to all Victorians who are experiencing or at risk of gambling harm, including family, friends and loved ones, and that is really important. The purpose of course of the legislation is to improve on the model of the foundation, creating those better connections that others have spoken about between the Gambler’s Help services, gambling harm research and prevention activities for the common comorbidities, as others have mentioned, experienced by people that have experienced that harm.

We remain committed to ensuring that we are doing everything we can to support those that are experiencing that harm, but what we will not do is play politics with these matters. What we will not do is be drawn into a political argument that is more about the politics and less about the person. It is about making sure that we are supporting those who, as I mentioned before, are indeed often in a really dire way, experiencing some of the lowest points in their life. It is the responsibly not just of the government but of all members of Parliament in both houses and of course all of our agencies, who I think work really hard each and every day, to support those experiencing this harm. For those reasons and many others which I will not get to, I commend the bill to the house.

Michael O’BRIEN (Malvern) (11:28): This is a profoundly disappointing bill because I genuinely believe it is going to have negative effects on tackling gambling-related harm in this state. Can I acknowledge the contributions particularly of the Shadow Minister for Casino, Gaming and Liquor Regulation the member for Gippsland South, the member for Ovens Valley and the member for Caulfield. I also acknowledge the contribution of the member for Eureka and her personal and lived experience of gambling-related harm.

I do think that this Parliament works better when it works on a bipartisan basis, and that is what is so profoundly disappointing about this bill. It is going to take away, it is going to destroy an opportunity for bipartisanship when it comes to tackling gambling-related harm. As the member for Gippsland South noted, when this policy was conceived by me in opposition before the 2014 election the idea was to replicate the success of VicHealth to take a bipartisan approach to promoting healthier outcomes and to take that and apply it in the gambling space. What the government is doing with this bill is removing any vestige of bipartisanship when it comes to tackling these matters. There will be no opportunity for the opposition or other parties to have a seat at the table. I would love somebody from the government to explain to me how that helps the community, how that helps deliver better outcomes, because this is a reversion to the failed systems of the past.

My interest in tackling gambling harm goes back a long way, back to when I was working as a legal adviser to Peter Costello in 1999. We commissioned the Productivity Commission to do a report on Australia’s gambling industries, and that was the first really significant deep dive into Australia’s gambling industries and to the harm that is created from gambling. I can tell you, at the time that was an inquiry which was resisted by a lot of state governments who saw gambling as being a cash cow for them, and they were not as concerned as they should have been about the harm that flows from the abuse of gambling as a product.

When I was subsequently elected to this place and given the opportunity by Ted Baillieu to serve as Shadow Minister for Gaming, I was very committed to thinking about how we can do better – how we can improve structures and systems to really tackle gambling-related harm better. I remember being in this place during a debate – Tony Robinson was the Minister for Gaming at the time and I was his shadow. He was up there on his feet and he was comparing Sydney’s Star casino to Melbourne’s Crown, and he talked about how gambling at Crown was – I will never forget the phrase ‍– ‘a rolled-gold, dark chocolate experience’ compared to the boiled lollies of gambling at Star in Sydney. What an outrageous thing for any minister to do. You are a minister of the Crown; you are not the Minister for Crown. I said in the chamber at the time that when he made comments like that he sounded like the love child of James Packer and Freddo frog. It was an outrageous thing to do, but it showed you the mindset of the Labor government at the time, and we wanted to do it differently. We wanted to do better.

That is why when I became minister the first thing I did was open the tent to say we did not pretend we knew everything; we wanted to bring in other people, other parties, other voices. I also did not think that the Minister for Gaming should be personally signing off on every piece of research that gets conducted, because governments are seen to have a conflict of interest. Now, you can argue whether they do or do not, but certainly the perception is that governments have got a conflict of interest when it comes to gambling policy, because they do make money out of gambling. So there can be a perception in the community that governments do not do as much as they could or try as hard as they should to eliminate or reduce gambling-related harm because that might affect their bottom line.

One of the ways we can deal with that is by taking the politics out and taking the ministerial approvals out and giving them to an independent board, and that is why the Victorian Responsible Gambling Foundation was created. And now the government wants to kill it off. It is a retrograde step. It is going to hurt those people in our community who suffer from gambling-related harm, and not just the problem gamblers themselves but their families and others. When we set up the VRGF it came with a 41 per cent increase in budget, so it was not just ‘Let’s change the structures,’ it was a big increase in funding to tackle gambling-related harm – $150 million over four years, a 41 per cent increase over what the previous Labor government had spent. It showed we were serious about it. We were serious about it. And the problem was we had all the attempts to tackle gambling-related harm – it was atomised; they were all in silos. There was no single agency that had responsibility and accountability for funding the research, for funding the advertisements, for the public awareness campaigns, for funding the Gambler’s Help services and for funding for venue support workers to go out into venues to try and make sure that staff who were supposedly trained in the responsible service of gambling actually delivered on that to provide assistance to people who needed assistance.

That is why the VRGF was created, and the government is now abolishing it. For what reason – to go back to a failed model of the past? Please explain to me that there is something more to it than just wanting to erase a little bit of a former government’s legacy, because I cannot see the sense in doing what the government is wanting to do. If the government thinks that we should change the name to maybe the Victorian Gambling Harm Minimisation Foundation, that is fine; we can do that. If the government thinks that the organisation can be improved – and yes, sure, the Victorian Auditor-General’s Office make criticisms of some aspects of the VRGF. Guess what, VAGO makes criticisms of every single organisation it audits – every single one. When VAGO makes criticisms of the health department we do not turn around and abolish the health department. When VAGO makes criticisms of Victoria Police we do not abolish the police. We fix it. This is a serious issue. I cannot take the government at face value, because what they say does not tally with what they are doing. I do not see how this is going to help tackle gambling-related harm in any way.

I was bemused to receive a letter signed by the Honourable Melissa Horne MP, Minister for Casino, Gaming and Liquor Regulation, dated 16 May, thanking me:

… for the important contribution you have made to the enhanced wellbeing of our community in your role as a director at the Victorian Responsible Gambling Foundation …

She said:

Since the Foundation was established in 2012, the Board’s leadership has underpinned significant developments in how gambling harm is perceived and addressed, most notably through a public health approach. Its insights and advice informed the recommendations of public inquiries, including the Royal Commission into the Casino Operator and Licence.

The Foundation’s research program has been instrumental in advancing understanding of the complex nature of gambling harm, how it manifests, who is affected and why some groups are more at risk than others.

That sounds like a pretty good recommendation for the work of the Victorian Responsible Gambling Foundation, so why on earth is the government seeking to get rid of it? ‘No, let’s go back to a failed system where everything’s in a silo.’ We have now got the situation where the gaming regulator is going to be asked to undertake some of the work of the foundation. And then what did Annette Kimmitt, the CEO of the regulator, say in the Public Accounts and Estimates Committee on 23 May:

So we are going to be working together with Health, with the department and the research arm of the department to develop – as soon as VRGF join us – a five-year strategy …

So you are saying that we are going to silo these things, atomise them – ‘Oh, but we’re all going to work together.’ We actually have an organisation that works together now – it is called the Victorian Responsible Gambling Foundation. That is why I do not support this bill. The member for Sunbury talked about playing politics; I think there is only one side of the house that is playing politics on this, and it is the government. They are abolishing something that does good work and that means a lot to people in the community, and we are going to see worse outcomes for Victorians as a consequence.

Can I pay tribute to the current directors of the board: Tass Mousaferiadis, the chair; Alison Roberts; Jim Pasinis; Lee Crockford; Tina Hosseini; and Zana Bytheway; and parliamentary representatives the member for Kororoit and the member for Shepparton. I also acknowledge the work of the member for Ovens Valley, who was on it for 10 years.

This is an important organisation. It was designed to do better than we have done in the past to tackle gambling-related harm. It was designed to do it in a transparent way and in a consolidated and integrated way. It was designed to do it with a level of bipartisanship. And now the government wants to walk away from all of that. For what reason – none that can be adequately explained. There has been nothing in the second-reading speech and nothing, with great respect, from the members so far and the contributions so far. This is a backwards step for gambling in this state. It is a backwards step for vulnerable people in this state. The bill is the wrong solution to the wrong question, and it should be opposed.

Luba GRIGOROVITCH (Kororoit) (11:38): I stand before you to speak on this bill. I heard the words that the member for Malvern had to say, and I respect not only his contribution to the initiation of the Victorian Responsible Gambling Foundation but also his continued work and advocacy on the board. I understand that for you this potentially is a sad day. However, this government believes firmly that this is a step in the right direction. I personally have spoken to the minister about the reasons why this step is being taken, and I firmly believe that it is the step that is best for harm minimisation here in Victoria, so I stand before you to commend this bill.

I want to thank my colleagues for their contributions previously. Everyone who has spoken in this place has spoken with the right dignity and respect, and the empathy that has come across from everyone has well and truly been noted, so thank you to everyone for their contributions.

I have been proud to sit on the board of the Victorian Responsible Gambling Foundation since August last year. It was a bit of a late start, but at the same time I have seen the good work that has happened at the VRGF, and I have proudly sat in the board meetings and listened to everyone’s thoughts and the varied debates that have occurred during that time. The foundation is a statutory authority which was created by the Victorian Parliament back in 2012, and it was specifically to address the challenges of gambling harm in the Victorian community. Over its 12 years the VRGF through its research agenda has established a body of knowledge and understanding of gambling harm and how it affects individuals, families and of course our communities. This growing evidence base has been supported by all aspects of the foundation’s work, including prevention programs, treatment and support services, public awareness campaigns and policy advice to the government. It has also been the basis upon which the VRGF has adopted a public health approach to gambling harm.

Over the foundation’s journey much has been achieved for Victorians experiencing or at risk of harm from gambling through its engagement and collaboration with the voices of lived experience; internationally renowned research program and evaluation and knowledge services; early intervention, prevention, treatment and support services through the Gambler’s Help program; public health, awareness-raising and help-seeking campaigns; advocacy in the public domain and provision of advice to government; the Love the Game and Be Ahead of the Game education programs; professional development work with the sector; the creation of an effective gambling harm prevention outcomes framework; and of course submissions to the 2021 Royal Commission into the Casino Operator and Licence.

The foundation’s functions and related activities are proposed to be delivered under a new operation model as of 1 July 2024. That work will continue to build the gambling harm knowledge base and continue to contribute to strategies that minimise gambling-related harm at an individual, a community and a population level. It has objectives of reducing the prevalence and severity of problem gambling and fostering responsible gambling.

This legislation before us today is a product of the foundation’s work together with the state government, which I am very proud and humbled to have been part of. I particularly want to single out and thank the Minister for Casino, Gaming and Liquor Regulation, my colleague the honourable member for Williamstown, who has been incredibly consultative with our chair and board on this legislation the entire way through. Her work on this has mostly gone unseen, but it has gone a long way to making the legislation as strong as it is.

As I have said before in this place, I absolutely loathe pokie machines and organised gambling because I have seen firsthand the destruction that they cause. In my teenage years I worked for a little while for a hot chicken and chips shop in Williamstown called Hot Wings. It was right next to the Williamstown high-rise public housing estate, which was next to what was formerly the Williamstown RSL. Every single day that I worked there elderly people from the housing estate would come in for a meal. These were people who were completely dependent on the age pension. They would come into the shop for a meal as soon as they had cashed their pension allowance. The first time you saw them after they had cashed their pension allowance they would order a full meal – chicken, chips, vegetables, you name it. The next time they came in they would simply order the $2 chips. Why? It was because it was all that they had left over. In the meantime they had gone down to the RSL, they had had their pension in their pocket and they had lost all of their money to the pokies. Every single time that would happen, and it always broke my heart.

Each year more than half a million Victorians experience gambling harm, whether it be related to their own or someone else’s gambling, and it costs Victoria an estimated $7 billion every year. As I have also noted before, the Brimbank local government area in my seat of Kororoit suffers the highest losses from gambling of any local government area in Victoria. We are literally ranked number one in the state. It is not a stat that any LGA is proud of or wants; it is a scourge on our community. Frankly, I personally do not think that pokies and electronic gambling should exist or need to exist in our community or in this state at all, and I do not think that it is really such a far-flung idea as others might.

Gambling harm can present as feelings of regret, shame, guilt, depression and anxiety, increased use of alcohol and other drugs and/or family violence. It leads to family and relationship breakdowns, loss of employment, homelessness and suicide, and its devastation is immeasurable. Because of these significant comorbidities, gambling harm can fall through the cracks in primary care settings when a person seeks treatment for other co-occurring issues. The siloed delivery of services and the stigmatised nature of gambling harm have meant that the integration of other supports has not occurred. This is a serious problem as there is a high degree of correlation between gambling and other issues. A 2017 study commissioned by the VRGF found that over 30 per cent of people presenting to mental health community support services were experiencing problems with gambling and around 75 ‍per cent of people presenting to a gambling service had a mental health issue. The lack of integration and warm referral pathways causes issues with treatment and retention. As service providers have noted, for a lot of people gambling harm occurs as a coping mechanism to deal with other issues, including mental health conditions. This is exacerbated by the fact that this is a stigmatised area of health. It is these terrible silos and gaps in support that this legislation is seeking to bring to an end.

The purpose of this bill is to improve the model of the responsible gambling foundation by creating better connections between gamblers, help services, gambling harm research and prevention activities, with the common comorbidities experienced by people with lived or living experiences of gambling harm. The government’s new model of prevention and response will mean that gambling harm reduction, prevention and therapeutic services will sit together in health to support a broad public health approach. It would also mean that publicly funded research is connected to and informs improvements to these vital health services. This is necessary, because having the sole public funder of gambling treatment services siloed in one entity that only deals with gambling harm has meant that the integration of its prevention and treatment programs with other services has been insufficient. The foundation’s research agenda has not been used to drive changes and improvements to the delivery of its treatment and prevention functions. In its 12 years of operation, the functions of the foundation have been relatively unchanged.

Broadly, the functions it delivers fall into three categories: first of all, the prevention and programs; secondly, gambling harm awareness; and third, research, evaluation and knowledge mobilisation. All of these functions will be retained in the new model of prevention and response. The prevention and programs function, including gamblers health, will be transferred to the Department of Health to enable better services integration with community health and of course clinical mental health expertise. These services will continue to be delivered across metropolitan and regional Victoria by community health organisations and will include the delivery of specialist therapeutic gambling and financial counselling through a network of local Gambler’s Help services, the delivery of community-based gambling harm prevention and community education activities and the delivery of training and support to gaming venues, including mandated responsible service of gambling training by venue support workers, which will also be based at the local Gambler’s Help services.

Sitting on the board of the VRGF has allowed me to experience firsthand the empathy many have got and the passion that many have for gambling harm minimisation. I thank each and every one on the board that has been part of it. I would warmly like to thank my colleagues on the VRGF – and of course our chair Tass Mousaferiadis – for their work on this and the passion and goodwill that they have brought to the table along with everyone else. I have really been pleased to see how much work can be done by people when they are driven by goodwill.

This is far from the last word I will have to say in this place in this term on gambling harm, and there is still much, much more work to be done for people in our communities. Meanwhile, I commend the legislation.

Kim O’KEEFFE (Shepparton) (11:48): Today I rise to make a contribution on the Victorian Responsible Gambling Foundation Repeal and Advisory Councils Bill 2024. In May last year I was appointed to be a director on the Victorian Responsible Gambling Foundation, joining the member for Malvern, and I take this opportunity to thank the member for Malvern for leading the way in this space and for his dedication and contribution over many years to the board.

Along with my fellow board members I am truly astounded and appalled by this decision by the ministers to abolish this foundation. This has been a massive shock to the foundation and still is to this day. The Victorian Responsible Gambling Foundation has been a highly functional body that has proven its value and the difference it has made addressing responsible gambling and gambling harm. To think at a time when people’s lives are severely impacted by gambling, during a cost-of-living crisis, this government is shutting down its key body who are providing a successful service to those most vulnerable.

We know that gambling addiction is linked to increased family violence as well as mental health issues and suicide. The Minister for Casino, Gaming and Liquor Regulation has not provided justification for this decision, and, as the lead speaker the member for Gippsland South raised, there has been no review and analysis or any clear reasoning for this decision. As the minister stated in her second-reading speech on the bill:

Each year, more than half-a-million Victorians experience gambling harm – whether it be related to their own or someone else’s gambling.

Half a million lives are impacted, yet we make a significant change with no review.

I did receive a letter of thanks, and the member for Malvern also mentioned the letter he received from the minister in regard to how outstandingly the board had performed and how the foundation had provided successful outcomes. I have also been so impressed by the hard work of the board and the incredible work that has been done not just during my time on the board but for the many years prior. I wanted to join this board, as my region has very high gambling harm statistics. In the new proposed model, how will the voices of the regions be heard?

I have also seen firsthand the devastation gambling addiction can have. A close friend has a gambling addiction, and none of us were aware until it was too late. He lost the family’s life savings, including the money from the sale of their family home. It was just the most devastating time not only for his family but also for us as close friends. The devastating part to this is there were no signs and he just kept running the bank account down until there was nothing left – over $200,000 gone. The impact on the family is life changing. They will never be able to afford to own a home again. We need to keep working hard to avoid these types of scenarios, and as we know, there are many stories like this.

I would like to pay tribute to the foundation’s board chair Tass Mousaferiadis and deputy chair Dr Alison Roberts as well as fellow directors and staff of the foundation. I must say that I have sat on many boards; this would have to be one of the most professional, productive and hardworking boards that I have been involved in. As I have mentioned, the minister has not given the board a relevant reason for this decision. When I look back on my time and what I have witnessed and the work prior, it has been an incredibly successful foundation. The foundation has played an important role in responsible gambling as well as supporting people affected by gambling harm by focusing on prevention, early intervention and support for those who are particularly vulnerable to gambling harm, as well as those living in regional and rural communities such as my electorate of Shepparton district.

The Victorian Responsible Gambling Foundation was first established by the former coalition government in 2012 under the Victorian Responsible Gambling Foundation Act 2011 specifically to address gambling harm in the Victorian community by the then Minister for Gaming the member for Malvern. The foundation’s purpose has been to prevent and reduce gambling harm for all Victorians. Since its establishment by the former coalition government, the foundation has funded research and other activities that add to the knowledge and understanding of gambling harm, worked in partnership with others to offer evidence-based prevention programs and support services to those affected by gambling harm and delivered communication campaigns that inform and influence gambling-related attitudes and behaviours.

Axing the Victorian Responsible Gambling Foundation will only place additional hurdles in the way of people with a gambling problem seeking assistance, help and support. Putting an important organisation like the Victorian Responsible Gambling Foundation on the chopping board has put further out of reach support for Victorians with a gambling problem. Problem gambling statistics continue to rise, and we know the incredible impact on those affected and their loved ones. This is not a program the Allan government should be cutting at a time when more households and individuals are under financial pressure and the risks of gambling harm are heightened. Despite being sold as a reform, this is clearly a cost-saving exercise, because the Allan Labor government cannot manage money and Victorians are paying the price. Instead, the Victorian Responsible Gambling Foundation will be moved to the Department of Health, to integrate, so the government claims, with community health services, and gambling harm awareness functions will be transitioned to the Victorian Gambling and Casino Control Commission. They are literally pulling apart these services, which will cause a disconnect and completely abolish the hard work that has been achieved so far.

There have been so many successful programs rolled out that have truly made a difference. In 2014 the Victorian Responsible Gambling Foundation launched the Love the Game sporting club program in response to community concern about the convergence of sport and gambling. To date the program helps reduce young people’s exposure to sports betting advertising and raises awareness of the risks of gambling harm for young people growing up in this particularly normalised environment. Some 659 sporting clubs across the state have signed up as part of the program, such as the Grahamvale Sports Club and Tallygaroopna Football Netball Club, which are in my electorate. In addition, more than 90 Victorian schools are involved through the school education program. Be Ahead of the Game is a school education program that is designed to help young people understand the risks associated with gambling and gambling harm. The program offers free 1-hour information sessions for students, parents and teachers; free curriculum-aligned teaching resources for upper primary to senior secondary students; as well as information and resources for parents and carers to support young people. Gambler’s Help is an important initiative that provides services via a range of community organisations across the state, particularly in rural and regional Victoria. Gambler’s Help provides services like online, telephone and face-to-face counselling and advice and information.

Across the Shepparton district electorate gambling has a significant impact on individuals that gamble. As such, data provided by the Victorian Gambling and Casino Control Commission for 2022–23 shows $117,000 alone was spent on pokies per day, equating to close to $43 million per year across eight venues with a combined total of 329 poker machines. From this data provided by the Victorian Gambling and Casino Control Commission, Greater Shepparton is ranked 28th in the state for high pokies expenditure. In addition, Greater Shepparton is ranked ninth in Victoria for socio-economic disadvantage. We should be supporting the foundation to continue their great work when the need for support for those experiencing gambling harm is so high, not retracting years of hard work and proven data when the foundation is making such a difference.

In closing, I just need to also raise a couple of incidents. I have a very close friend who has an 18-year-old son, and at this very time she is trying to support him in regard to his gambling addiction. We know the young people within our community often get on their phones and gamble. This young gentleman was at university, and he has now had to remove himself from his education due to his gambling addiction. We know there are many incidents, but it is the young people across my communities that really deeply worry me. They are the people of our future, and we have to keep trying to do more. I oppose this bill before the house.

John MULLAHY (Glen Waverley) (11:55): It is a pleasure to rise to speak in favour of the Victorian Responsible Gambling Foundation Repeal and Advisory Councils Bill 2024. From the outset I would like to thank the Minister for Casino, Gaming and Liquor Regulation and her team for putting an immense effort into this piece of legislation. Their work to do all they can to ensure that the government’s gambling harm prevention and response is up to date and effective should be commended. I would like to acknowledge the member for Eureka and her ongoing contributions to this house with regard to gambling and the effects that it has had on her life. Her contributions are always very raw and emotional and give us a good sense of the consequences of gambling here in this state.

The importance of continual reform in this space cannot be overstated. Victorians lost an estimated $3 billion in the last financial year. Let me repeat that: $3 billion. Residents in the Glen Waverley district, unfortunately, were no outlier to this horrific statistic. Across the City of Monash $122.5 million was lost last year, and $56 million was lost in the City of Whitehorse. Just last month, in April, more than $9 million and $5 million was lost respectively in Monash and Whitehorse. There can be no clearer picture painted of the serious harm that these electronic gaming machines cause to my constituents and Victorians as a whole.

It is extremely alarming that each year more than half a million Victorians experience gambling harm, either through their own gambling or because of others’ actions. This costs Victoria some $7 billion every year. We know that gambling harm does not just stop at financial distress, as profound as that is. It brings a profound sense of guilt and shame, often leading to mental health disorders such as anxiety and depression. And with these serious struggles we tragically lose too many of our fellow Victorians to suicide. Symptoms can also present as mood swings and general irritability as well as lashing out at others. Many lose relationships with their friends and loved ones, which further perpetuates the downward spiral filled with negativity and sorrow. Further, there is quantifiable evidence to link gambling harm to both substance and alcohol abuse as well as increased family and domestic violence. What this clearly highlights is that gambling harm is a multifaceted problem, not just in the pure numerical and financial sense but much more so in a holistic sense. Such a complex and complicated issue requires sophisticated and tailored responses to target both preventative and response measures. That is why this government is introducing this bill – to tackle these issues with efficacy and conviction.

This bill seeks to amend the Gambling Regulation Act 2003 to establish the Gambling Harm Response Fund and abolish the Responsible Gambling Ministerial Advisory Council and the Liquor Control Advisory Council. It will also amend the Victorian Gambling and Casino Control Commission Act ‍2011 to transfer certain functions from the Victorian Gambling and Casino Control Commission as well as amend the Liquor Control Reform Act 1998 to abolish the Liquor Control Advisory Council.

In essence, these changes establish and implement the framework of the government’s new gambling harm prevention and response model. To put it simply, the government has decided that programs which serve a preventative purpose are now better suited to the Department of Health to facilitate fluid integration and multiple services. Gambling harm prevention campaigning will now be the responsibility of the Victorian Gambling and Casino Control Commission, fitting in with the commission’s key goals of harm minimisation, and research and evaluation will be transferred to the Department of Justice and Community Safety, giving this multifaceted issue a cross-portfolio overview and response.

These major reforms have come about through a process of extensive stakeholder engagement and communication. Not only were the government agencies and departments consulted, the Victorian Responsible Gambling Foundation’s staff and board were also engaged. Further consultation occurred with Gambler’s Help and harm prevention providers as well as the Municipal Association of Victoria, the Alliance for Gambling Reform and the Victorian InterChurch Gambling Taskforce. Through this process it was made clear that a publicly accessible and accountable model of addressing gambler harm will continue. This, in conjunction with the opportunity for better cooperation and coordination of integrated services, would provide an environment in which these functions could complement each other.

Another significant point raised was the current governance structure. It is outdated and in need of updating. In reflecting upon the Victorian Responsible Gambling Foundation Act 2011, this bill removes the Responsible Gambling Ministerial Advisory Council and the Liquor Control Advisory Council. These are historical forms of stakeholder and community engagement which are no longer fit for purpose. The methods in which such engagement occurs can now be hindered by older structures, and this bill seeks to create more opportunities for greater consultation. This includes reaching out to those with lived experience – either directly or indirectly – of gambling harm, making for an up-to-date system. Being provided with a diversity of views and perspectives will better inform how policies are made and implemented.

As forementioned, gambling harm is an issue which extends beyond financial means, which is extremely dangerous in itself. This is a public health problem which needs to be addressed in a way which encapsulates all the other issues that follow it. We must recognise the stigma which follows from both gambling and mental health issues and how that can act as a deterrent to individuals reaching for support. Around 75 per cent of people who present to a gambling help service also have a mental health issue. A study showed that over 30 per cent of people who seek mental health support have a gambling issue. The interconnectedness of these symptoms means that if we do not have a coordinated approach, people can fall through the cracks. This bill seeks to address this specifically, formulating a pathway for a more integrated and inclusive approach and providing a warmer and more welcoming environment for people to speak up.

On top of the prevention and protection programs, gambling harm awareness and research will continue to be funded. We want to see services delivered with a basis of understanding which stems from publicly funded research. With more knowledge and data, any possible improvements in policy can be evaluated and actioned. The reform also provides community-based gambling harm prevention activities, including at schools. We know the younger children, especially teenagers, are more likely to be negatively influenced in their formative years. I remember recently just walking down the streets of Kingsway in Glen Waverley and seeing a group of probably 15- or 16-year-olds – four of them – all discussing what they were currently going to bet on with regard to a multi on their phones. So we need to make sure that we protect our future generations from the scourge of gambling harm. Another popular form of gambling aside from the pokies is sports betting, which is why we are having a positive engagement with young people at sporting clubs to communicate harm prevention measures, seeking to mitigate longer term risks. And finally, this bill, through the Victorian Responsible Gambling Foundation, will deliver training and support to venues which have electronic gaming machines.

The foundation has done tremendous work in helping those who suffer from the consequences of gambling harm, and I congratulate all of those who do such incredible work in this space. It is great to hear that all existing staff will continue to have a job in this critical sector helping people in some of their most vulnerable moments. We all recognise the significant emotional toll this would have on staff, which is why funding is provided for suicide prevention and mental health supports for them too. This government has a strong record to stand on in investing $165 million into supporting Victorians who are experiencing or who are at risk of experiencing gambling harm, but we know that there is always more work to do.

This bill will make improvements to the functions of the foundation so that there can be greater coordination for a more integrated approach. It will facilitate the creation of pathways for other public health responses to be intertwined, including mental health, alcohol and substance abuse, financial counselling and family violence services. It recognises that there is always potential for better public campaigns to raise awareness to prevent potential harm and better support for those who work in the industry. I am proud to support these measures which seek to promote positive and honest conversations about gambling harm from an early age in schools to sporting clubs and sporting venues. In the case that people do experience the financial, emotional, mental or societal harms from gambling, this bill forms an empathetic yet strong network of support for victims.

I again commend the work being undertaken in this process, from vast and extensive consultation to listening to the recommendations of the Victorian Auditor-General’s Reducing the Harm Caused by Gambling report. I am proud to be part of an Allan Labor government which takes tackling the stigma around gambling harm seriously to provide a warm and caring environment for people to open up and find the help that they need. I believe this bill takes the appropriate measures in modernising our response to gambling harm, from an understanding that this is a broad issue which has diverse intersections. It correctly addresses wider public health issues. It places a necessary focus on the prevention of and response to gambling harm as well as the policy research and evaluation functions which are all in conjunction required to deal with this significant issue. I am proud to commend this bill to the house.

Jade BENHAM (Mildura) (12:05): It does not give me any pleasure to rise to speak on the repeal of the Victorian Responsible Gaming Foundation. I was just having a conversation with the member for Shepparton, who was in fact on the board from early last year and cannot speak highly enough about the work that the foundation does and has done, the data that it analyses, the lived experience it takes into account and particularly the work that the VRGF does in regional and rural Victoria. Before I really get into it, I would like to acknowledge the member for Eureka for sharing her stories. As I well know, sharing lived experience and personal stories in this place can be rough, but I think it is vitally important and gives a very human element to how we approach these sorts of things.

The purpose of the bill, as we have heard from many of the speakers throughout the day, as the title suggests, is to implement the government’s repeal of the VRGF and to allocate its current responsibilities between the Department of Health, the Department of Justice and Community Safety and the Victorian Gambling and Casino Control Commission. It axes both the Responsible Gaming Ministerial Advisory Council and the Liquor Control Advisory Council without legislating a replacement model. It is perplexing enough that you would make a move like this without legislating a replacement model to take over the work that both of those councils are doing. It also replaces the Responsible Gambling Fund with the Gambling Harm Response Fund.

I think everyone will agree that gambling reform is needed and more work is needed in this space. As the member for Shepparton was talking about, with another important personal story, when you have children – I am sorry, at 18 you are still a child. I was still very much a child. I am sure you were still very much a child, Acting Speaker, at the age of 18. But to have an addiction to gambling with largely because of electronic gambling, whether that is mobile phones or iPads, just the accessibility of it – the only checks and balances are a pop-up box that says ‘Are you 18?’ – anyone, if they can read the word ‘yes’, can get around that. To hear stories like that is really quite heartbreaking, and more needs to be done in this space.

But I am just perplexed as to why this would be the move forward. The work that the VRGF do is, from someone that sits on the board, amazing. They are doing such great work. They are a respectful board. They are doing fantastic work. But then to send all of what they are doing in three different directions to essentially do the same thing not only sounds like double handling to me but sounds like triple handling. I will quote from a letter to the member for Shepparton. A couple of paragraphs in, the Minister for Casino, Gaming and Liquor Regulation says:

The Foundation’s research program has been instrumental in advancing understanding of the complex nature of gambling harm, how it manifests, who is affected and why some groups are more at risk than others. Of particular importance has been the work on the significant comorbidities of gambling harm, including mental ill-health, drug and alcohol use and family violence.

One begets the other more often than not, I suppose, is what I am trying to say.

I know it was raised in the Public Accounts and Estimates Committee last week why we would take a single foundation that is doing amazing work and spread it in three different directions. The member for Gippsland South said to the minister at the time, or it may have been a member of the department, that it just feels like it is the vibe of the thing. He asked if it was political, because this was something that was set up by the Liberals and the Nationals. We have got someone sitting here who sat on the foundation and who speaks so highly about the work that is being done, the data that has been collected and the research that is being done. Again, I just fail to see why you would repeal a foundation from doing that work. That is my main issue with this bill. I cannot understand the repeal, and I wish someone would publicly justify it, because I cannot see why on earth we would be doing this.

When we go back to talking about gambling reform, again I think there are other measures we could take. I do a lot of work in my cross-border community, and moving forward with gambling reform needs consideration. We know the border is an issue. Having one set of rules on one side of the river compared to the other is a real problem because it does nothing for gambling harm in Victoria on the border. You literally go 5 minutes from Victoria across the road to the clubs in New South Wales, where the rules are completely different, and we will see this come out down the line with the other reforms that have been flagged. There needs to be much more consideration to this. I had the Shadow Minister for Casino, Gaming and Liquor Regulation up with me in Mildura and Robinvale a couple of months ago so I could show him, because I know it is difficult to understand how close these clubs are from one side of the border to the other. So I brought him up to have a look and see that it is literally 5 minutes from the Euston Club Resort to the Robinvale Golf Club, for example, where there are large gaming rooms. It is the same thing in Mildura, with all of the different venues there, and the Coomealla club, for example. One set of rules – I talk about having separate regulations or reforms for regional, rural and particularly border communities, because doing one thing in Victoria and not having a border bubble or a border precinct on both sides, particularly with gambling reform, is just fraught with danger.

I have been doing a lot of consultation since these gambling reforms were flagged, particularly at the Gateway hotel and the Mildura Working Man’s Club. They are concerned as well, and the point they make is actually really valid. It started with just a conversation about these possible reforms with the CEO of the Gateway hotel. He was adamant that instead of overcomplicating things we should enforce licences within venues for gambling machines. If you start enforcing licences and venues then are at serious risk of losing their licences, they will soon pull their heads in. They will soon enforce what they are supposed to be doing. And I am sure for the most part most venues do; most venues are very good at toeing the line and doing what they have to do. But for the few that do not and that ruin it for everyone else, start enforcing the licences. If they breach it, shut them down for 30 days. Thirty days of having your gaming room locked is really significant. If they do it again, it is 60 days, then three strikes and you are out. It might sound oversimplistic, but sometimes I think we have to get back to the fundamentals and simplify this stuff rather than overcomplicating it.

I was listening to the member for Malvern before, and he referred to this letter as well. We are just perplexed, after the work that the foundation has done, about why on earth you would take this from that one pathway and from a board that was very respectful. I know that they are devastated that this is happening, because they put their heart and soul into it. There are people with lived experience that have contributed, and I know that they are devastated. I am having real trouble understanding why this is being repealed and what the outcomes are going to be.

Paul MERCURIO (Hastings) (12:15): I am happy to stand and talk to the Victorian Responsible Gambling Foundation Repeal and Advisory Councils Bill 2024. It is a little bit like Baz Luhrmann’s Red Curtain Trilogy inasmuch as this is the third time we have debated a gambling bill in this place over the last year. Unlike Baz’s Red Curtain Trilogy, I am sure this will not be the last time we talk about gambling.

Back in May 2023 we debated the Gambling Taxation Bill 2023, which delivered significant recommendations of the Royal Commission into the Casino Operator and Licence to strengthen the casino taxation acts around Crown Casino. That bill consolidated the administration of a number of Victoria’s gambling taxes and also implemented the 2023–24 budget measures. It established a new standalone Gambling Taxation Act which brought Victoria into line with other states to provide a fairer amount of revenue for Victoria. In my view I characterise that bill as a fair go.

In October last year we debated the Gambling Legislation Amendment Bill 2023, which made amendments to the Casino Control Act 1991, the Gambling Regulation Act 2023 and the Casino (Management Agreement) Act 1993 to deliver gambling harm reforms and improve the implementation of recommendations of the Royal Commission into the Casino Operator and Licence. The amendments sought to minimise gambling-related harm through the reduction in load-up limits on gambling machines from $1000 to $100; an increase in spin rates to slow the rate of play on new gambling machines, reducing the speed at which people lost money or could launder money; and a statewide mandatory precommitment and carded play. To me the best part of that reform is the legislation that will make sure that all electronic gambling venues outside the casino are closed between 4 am and 10 am. There will be no more staging of closing hours, providing people with an important break in play. I characterise this as a bill of action.

And now we have the third act. This bill repeals the Victorian Responsible Gambling Foundation Act ‍2011 and amends the Gambling Regulation Act 2023, the Victorian Gambling and Casino Control Commission Act 2011 and the Liquor Control Reform Act 1998. The bill will abolish the Victorian Responsible Gambling Foundation as well as abolish the Responsible Gambling Ministerial Advisory Council and the Liquor Control Advisory Council. It will establish the Gambling Harm Response Fund and will provide additional functions to the Victorian Gambling and Casino Control Commission. This bill makes sure it is fair for all. This bill makes sure that action is taken, and this bill wraps around our community and sets out how it will achieve those things set out in the previous two bills. The main aim of these bills is to reduce gambling harm or indeed minimise it to such an extent it no longer exists.

I just want to read a quote from a media release today that might help the member for Mildura understand what is going on. It is from the Alliance for Gambling Reform, and they say:

The proposed changes outlined in the VRGF Repeal and Advisory Councils Bill 2024 before the Victorian parliament have been welcomed by The Alliance for Gambling Reform.

The Alliance for Gambling Reform, CEO Carol Bennett said the proposal to disband the Victorian Responsible Gambling Foundation (VRGF) being debated in the Victorian parliament this week were a step in the right direction.

“We welcome the fact the budget – $165m over four years is unchanged, and the functions of the disbanded Victorian Responsible Gambling Foundation … will now reflect more of a ‘whole of government’ approach incorporating them into departments of health and justice as well as expanding the role of the regulator …

The information and research that the VRGF has done will be kept and used. The alliance is a great organisation of people with deep, lived experience, and I certainly take their excitement and agreement on this bill as a good thing.

Just to be clear – this is something I have wanted to talk about before – those that experience harm from gambling are not problem gamblers. They do not have a gambling problem; they are in fact addicts that are, unfortunately, preyed upon by the gambling industry, who need them to generate profits that many gambling premises and casinos enjoy. The definition of an addict is someone exhibiting a compulsive, chronic physiological or psychological need for a habit-forming substance, behaviour or activity – someone unable to stop taking, using or doing something as a habit. There are plenty of good habits out there that do not cause anything like the harm that gambling addicts suffer and endure.

I have said before in this place that I do not gamble. I do not actually understand the appeal of gambling. I am not allured by it. The most I might gamble is to buy a lotto ticket every couple of months, and I generally never win. I acknowledge that there are plenty of people that can gamble safely and responsibly. That said, I have had friends that have developed gambling addictions, and I have seen firsthand what gambling harm has done to them, their jobs, their careers and their families. So I just want to talk about gambling harm for a minute, because we really need to understand and paint a picture of what it looks like and why this bill is so important.

It is inconceivable to me that Australians lose more to electronic gambling machines per capita than any other country in the world. In the last financial year Australians across only five states lost a staggering $14.5 billion to poker machines in pubs and clubs. For the 2022–23 financial year Victorians lost over $3 billion on electronic gaming machines and $2.6 billion on online, trackside and venue wagering services. Just to be clear, this amount does not include losses to poker machines at the casino. These losses cause enormous damage to not just the people losing their money but also their families, their friends, their relationships, their mental health, their work environment and their community. This damage includes family violence, homelessness, family breakdowns, physical and mental health issues and quite often suicide attempts. There is a very strong link between gambling and suicide, and when you talk to former gambling addicts they will, without doubt, tell you of people they have known with gambling addictions, people they have sat next to at the pokies who are no longer here because they have taken their life because of their addiction. It is not just the fact that they lost their house, their marriage, their friends, their job or even their children; it is the inconsolable shame of their addiction and what it has driven them to do.

There was a study undertaken by the Federation University in collaboration with the Coroners Court of Victoria of suicides between 2009 and 2016 where the Victorian suicide register was examined. It revealed at least 184 suicides were directly related to gambling harm – and I am sorry, but that does not sound like harm to me, it sounds like devastation. There were an additional 17 gambling-attributed suicides by affected others, such as family members. Researchers concluded that gambling-related suicides were about 4 per cent of total suicides in Victoria, but they also believe that it is actually much, much higher than that and could be up to 20 per cent. I might add that there is not really enough or proper research being done in this area of gambling-related suicides, and much more could be done and needs to be done.

Importantly, something we should all think about and keep at the front of our minds is that there is no research on those addicted gamblers who have attempted suicide, some of them multiple times. It is estimated that every year in Australia 65,000 people attempt suicide. How many of those are from gambling? Well, if you go back to the 4 per cent, suicide attempts would be 2600 people a year, and if it is as high as 20 per cent, then you are talking 13,000 people a year attempting suicide because of gambling. That is what addiction does. Gambling addiction exacts an inordinate toll of misery and is often worse in poorer communities across Victoria and indeed Australia.

In looking at this I also wondered what the actual financial cost to the community was from gambling-related suicides. Working out the real cost of suicide and non-fatal suicide attempts is complex and complicated, but according to a paper published in 2017 on the National Library of Medicine website the approximate cost in 2014 was estimated to be around $6.5 billion. If 4 per cent of suicides were gambling related, that would equal a quarter of a billion dollars.

An estimated 330,000 Victorians experience harm as a result of gambling each year, costing Victoria around $7 billion annually. These people are not well served by the current model, and that is why the Victorian government has developed a new gambling harm prevention and response model, which aims to embed a more holistic approach to addressing gambling harm. This bill makes sure people do not fall through the cracks – that they can access the help and care they need, no matter where they live. I commend the bill to the house.

Tim READ (Brunswick) (12:25): The bill before us seeks to abolish the Victorian Responsible Gambling Foundation (VRGF), and I will address the content of the bill in my remarks. But let us just take a moment to remind ourselves about gambling and more importantly the harm it inflicts across Victoria. Preventing gambling harm has been part of the Greens’ platform for decades. What do we know about gambling in Victoria? We know the harm is that gambling strip-mines people and communities across Victoria of their savings, their homes, their other assets, their family relationships, their dignity and their future. We also know from the data where the harm is occurring. The most severely affected communities are those in local government areas at the lowest socio-economic level. We sadly, tragically, know the extent of the harm. In Victoria there were at least 184 gambling-related suicides from 2009 to 2016, and researchers point out that the number of suicides is likely to be higher than that. We know how gambling harm is inflicted.

While all forms of gambling generate harm, by far the largest monster in the pack is poker machines, and these machines are designed to be addictive. They are disproportionately located in already stressed communities where residents experience the highest losses and the highest rates of gambling harm. Since they were introduced into this state by the Kirner Labor government in 1991, regrettably Victorians have lost more than $66 billion to the machines.

There has been welcome action from the government over the past two years. Much of this has been to reform how the casino operates and is managed, necessitated by the excoriating royal commission into Crown’s unscrupulous and illegal behaviour. The government is to be commended for having implemented or set in place to be implemented soon all of the royal commission recommendations. One of those recommendations was to establish a new regulator. The government acted, and the Victorian Gambling and Casino Control Commission is open, staffed and operating. Encouragingly, we see that they have been active in conducting investigations and issuing infringements.

We commend the government for taking action last year to reduce and standardise opening hours. From October this year all venues that have gaming machines must be closed from 4 am to 10 am, stopping the shocking situation of venues staggering their opening hours and bussing addicted people between those venues to allow 24-hour access to gambling. The Greens believe that venues should be closed from midnight to 10 am, which is informed by the clear evidence that the majority of gambling harm occurs in the hours before 4 am, but it is welcome and at least a step in the right direction.

I do note that the larger reforms for gambling announced by then Premier Andrews in July 2023 have yet to be brought before the Parliament, aside from the opening hours, and we hope to see this package of reforms soon. We also welcomed the comments by the minister at the Public Accounts and Estimates Committee hearings last week that another set of reforms may be on the table to have a mandatory break in play built into reforms. We have asked the minister’s office to provide more information on that. These reforms are still a long way away from Western Australia and indeed many other countries, where poker machines are confined to casinos. WA has less gambling harm and still has a thriving pub and club culture.

Let us turn to the details of this bill, which is to abolish the Victorian Responsible Gambling Foundation. That foundation was set up as a statutory authority with a goal to prevent and reduce gambling harm for all Victorians. Since 2011 it has funded research and other activities that add to the knowledge and understanding of gambling harm, and it maintains an excellent dataset that is easily accessible. It has worked in partnership with others to deliver prevention programs and support services to those affected by gambling harm, and it has run communication campaigns that inform and influence gambling-related attitudes and behaviours. There are two main questions that I have. First, these are all vital public functions, and all should be continued in Victoria. If the VRGF is to be abolished, where will these vital services be provided, and how well are those agencies placed to deliver them? Second, what is the broader policy, legislative and operational context in which those functions will be delivered, and how does that inform this debate?

Let us turn to the first of those questions. If the government wishes to abolish the VRGF, what does the government propose in its place? The minister’s office has communicated that those functions will be distributed across three agencies: The Victorian Gambling and Casino Control Commission will be responsible for gambling harm awareness and prevention programs; the Department of Health will run prevention functions, including Gambler’s Help; and the Department of Justice and Community Safety Victoria will set up and develop expertise in public health research, policy and evaluation functions.

For a transition that includes the abolition of a statutory body, which is no small thing in the architecture of government, one would reasonably expect at least some document, such as a position paper, which lays out the justification for abolishing the VRGF and detailing where those functions will be delivered by government, how they will be implemented and how they will be evaluated. It would be useful to see such a document, if it exists.

Just last November, this Parliament’s Public Accounts and Estimates Committee, or PAEC, conducted an inquiry into gambling and liquor regulation in Victoria following up three Auditor-General reports. That inquiry did hear evidence that there were gaps in the foundation’s effectiveness and raised questions about its ability to address the complex challenges posed by the current regulatory framework. The same committee heard that the VRGF should be reformed. Suggestions for reform included establishing an independent oversight body which could monitor the foundation’s activities and ensure accountability. It would be multi-disciplinary, with experts in public health, addiction treatment and governance. The committee found:

From mid 2024 funding for the VRGF will be discontinued and the functions of the VGRF will be assumed by other government agencies. Significant work will be required by the VGRF’s successors to fully implement the Auditor-General’s recommendations to prevent and protect the community from gambling harm.

So we ask: will any of these agencies that replace the VRGF be required to report on progress against the Auditor-General’s 2020–2021 findings, or do these recommendations evaporate if the statutory authority that has been audited no longer exists? We also do not know if some of the existing problems will be solved. Will there be a process to ensure the identification and selection of relevant research topics and projects is independent? How can we be assured that the commissioning and publication of such research is efficient and effective? Will there be regular and independent reviews of the delivery and availability of gambling harm treatment services? This brings me to the second question I outlined earlier: what is the broader policy, legislative and operational context in which those functions will be delivered, and how does that inform this debate? The VRGF was set up to prevent and reduce gambling harm for all Victorians and so must the three agencies the government has now designated to perform those functions.

With my public health hat on, there is the proverbial ambulance at the bottom of the cliff analogy, which seems relevant here. You can have as many ambulances as you can afford, but unless you build a fence at the top of the cliff, people will continue to fall off – people will continue to suffer. By the way, speaking of ambulances, we know that only 22 per cent of those with a gambling disorder seek help, and three quarters of those have some form of mental illness. So it was good to see a motion passed at Labor’s state conference calling out government inaction on implementing worker-specific treatment for drugs and alcohol and gambling.

Returning now to harm reduction: most of the harm reduction will come from the government deciding to limit how much, where and when gambling harm can be inflicted. Until we see those new limits, how can we properly assess how many gambling harm ambulances we will need at the bottom of that cliff? Apart from the opening hours, and now the break-in-play reforms that were hinted at in PAEC, the other indicators are not encouraging that significant reduction in harm will be achieved. Tax revenue from poker machines in Victoria is expected to keep rising after a dip next year anticipated from the introduction of forced early-morning closures. Evidence in PAEC hinted that mandatory minimum limits may not be part of the reform package. We know there are other actions the government could take to limit harm from gambling, from ending gambling advertising in public spaces to extinguishing unallocated licences. Without seeing the larger package of legislative reforms, we do not know if sensible things that reduce gambling are included. Given all of these unknown variables and the lack of information about what the gambling environment will be after the broader reform package, and measuring it against the terrible depth and impact of gambling harm that persists in Victoria, today we are unable to support the bill in its current form.

Alison MARCHANT (Bellarine) (12:35): Today I rise to add my contribution to the debate on the Victorian Responsible Gambling Foundation Repeal and Advisory Councils Bill 2024. I feel that in the country itself, in Australia, the conversation around gambling is starting to change. We have indeed been a country that likes to have punt, and gambling has been part of our culture, whether that be TattsLotto tickets, horse racing, casinos, betting on sport, and now we have got a culture around betting on our phones – betting on anything really. It is a culture that has shifted. But we are getting better at identifying those issues that we are seeing with problem gambling. We have those in our community who can gamble responsibly, but there are many in our community who cannot do that. I have heard some contributions about it being an addiction, and I certainly concur with those sorts of remarks. This is a health issue that we are now particularly dealing with in our communities, gambling.

When the conversations have changed and the evidence has changed, we in this place – I would probably like to confirm that it has been more this side of the chamber – have always been up for the debate and up for the reforms that are needed. If we have evidence in front of us and expert advice, regardless of what topic it is, we have a duty to listen, to look at that and to ask: ‘What can we do here in this place to better our community with our legislation and reforms?’ We have always been a party to do that. This is another example of that, where we are modernising and listening to the experts to make some reform.

The Victorian Responsible Gambling Foundation, established many years ago in 2012, was at the time a necessary step. We admit that. It was there to address that prevalence around problem gambling. However, as I have indicated, our understanding of gambling harm has matured, and so too must our strategies in addressing that.

Last year the Minister for Casino, Gaming and Liquor Regulation announced some of our most significant packages in gambling reforms. These reforms included mandatory carded play, precommitments, standardised closing times, reducing load-up limits and slowing the spin rates. At the time I remember speaking in this place about the amount of people that those reforms were really addressing. It was estimated that around half a million Victorians are experiencing gambling harm, and it may be related to their own gambling habits but it may also be from someone else’s gambling at their own cost – say, someone in their family. This cost is around $7 billion annually, and this is leading to significant financial distress, mental health concerns and relationship issues. The reforms that we were making were really to ensure that patrons had adequate protection when they sat down at an electronic gaming machine at their local hotel or club, and it was to assist those people with problem gambling. I have heard comments too today about those electronic gaming machines being addictive; they are designed to be addictive. We know that some people can monitor themselves, but others cannot, and there are consequences and effects from that.

I will bring it back to my own electorate and my own area and region. It is pretty clear in terms of the amount of dollars spent in my region of the electorate of Bellarine, which covers the Geelong and the Borough of Queenscliffe local government areas. In April this year the amount lost by players from just over 1300 gaming machines was $10,944,874.20. In March of the same year it had nearly reached $12 million. These are absolutely large numbers. They seem ridiculous to me; it is incomprehensible. These figures are representing people that can gamble responsibly but also those people spending those dollars who are not – who are struggling to manage their gambling habits.

When the minister announced the reforms for this bill, it was that the functions of the current Victorian Responsible Gambling Foundation would be transferred to other parts of government. The focus will be more on preventing and reducing gambling harm across our communities, so they will be put into other parts of the Victorian government departments. We need to take a public health response and approach to this.

Thanks in part to the foundation’s own research, we do have a clearer understanding now of the multifaceted nature of gambling harm. Gambling harm comes in various forms, and also it is very often interconnected in many ways. Families of problem gamblers will face financial problems. It can lead to significant losses and family financial instability. Families may lose their homes, savings and other assets. There is also that emotional and psychological stress. When dealing with those financial instabilities, gamblers’ behaviours can cause anxiety, depression and other mental health issues. There are also trust issues with that, with repeated broken promises and that financial secrecy. Persistent issues in gambling can also lead to a breakdown of relationships. There are social implications. Families that are dealing with gambling problems often withdraw from social activities and support networks due to the shame and the embarrassment or the lack of financial stability, and the stigma associated with that can lead to judgement and further isolation. And in extreme cases problem gamblers can resort to illegal activities, such as theft and fraud.

It is important to note that a 2017 study commissioned by the foundation found that up to 30 per cent of people presenting to primary care, alcohol and other drugs and mental health services were also experiencing problems with gambling. The replacement of this foundation with a new model of gambling harm prevention and response is focused on improving those services and integrating referral pathways across our social service system. This focus is grounded in best practice as well as findings from major inquiries, including the Royal Commission into Victoria’s Mental Health System and the recommendations that came out of the Royal Commission into Family Violence.

I have just heard today, from sitting here for a few minutes, the other side’s confusion, maybe, around this bill and the removal of this foundation. Like I said before, it is really about modernising it after we had expert advice provided to us. As a government, we must modernise and be responsive to that. The Victorian Auditor-General, though, also had a report, Reducing the Harm Caused by Gambling, and it was on the Victorian Responsible Gambling Foundation. This report concluded:

The Foundation does not know whether its prevention and treatment programs are effectively reducing the severity of gambling harm.

While the Foundation may help some people through its programs, it does not understand their broader impact. This is because the Foundation lacks an outcome-based framework to develop programs and measure their results.

In addition, while the Foundation funds research and program evaluation, it does not always use this evidence to improve program design and service delivery.

Maybe the other side might be able to get that report out and have a look at it. I encourage them to read that report to understand the reasoning behind this bill. These reforms have also been supported by others who have worked in this space, including the Alliance for Gambling Reform, who said:

We welcome the fact the budget – $165m over four years is unchanged, and the functions of the disbanded ‍… Foundation … will … reflect more of a ‘whole of government’ approach …

This is the reason why we have this bill in front of us today as well. Our government’s new model of prevention and response therefore will be in several departments: the Department of Health and the Department of Justice and Community Safety as well. By adopting this bill, we are really taking a decisive step towards a more integrated, effective and compassionate approach to reducing gambling harm, and together we can support those that are affected by this to build a healthier and safer Victoria for all. I thank the minister for her work on this reform, and I am proud that we have a government that is ready and willing to make these reforms to help our most vulnerable.

Sarah CONNOLLY (Laverton) (12:45): I too rise to speak on the Victorian Responsible Gambling Foundation Repeal and Advisory Councils Bill 2024. I have stood here many times over the past six years or so since being elected, and in relation to the bills and legislative reform we have put before the house when it comes to gambling harm minimisation, it often makes me reflect on gambling within my own family. I feel like it skipped a generation with my sister and me but certainly found its way to my brother. I would not say he is someone who has an addiction to gambling, but he loves a good punt and loves being down at the local RSL or bowls club, having a cheap meal and cheap drinks with his friends and playing the pokies.

That was certainly something that I saw growing up with my nanna, the great Nanna Jean, who was a wonderful woman. She loved going to the same bowls club, and she often played the pokies when her pension came in. She was actually deaf, completely deaf, and I think part of the isolation for her was that Grandad had passed away many years prior. Being deaf – she went deaf at I think 50 or 60 – and having that kind of disability was really isolating. She loved going to the bowls club and she loved playing the pokies. I think she used to put in 5-cent pieces, because I remember she used to try and push them into our hands when we went down to the bowls club when we went with her for a meal and say, ‘Oh, you’ve got to have a go, you’ve got to have a go.’ It was something that was never passed on to my sister and me, but my brother certainly loves it.

But like Nanna Jean, her brother Les, who we would probably say today was someone who was an alcoholic, also had a gambling addiction, and he was a man who lost his family over it and was completely estranged from his children. You know, as you get older and you learn about family history, I think there was an element of family violence there as well – so alcoholism, addiction to gambling and family violence, the three things that have been talked about I think many, many times over in this chamber whilst contributions have been made on this bill.

This is a really important bill, and it is looking at the Victorian Responsible Gambling Foundation, which functions as an important pillar of our gambling response, and seeking to basically update and modernise the roles and functions of the foundation by dismantling it and transferring these roles. This is something that I wholeheartedly support, and I say from the outset that I commend the bill to the house. It goes without saying that addressing mental health and addressing the social and financial impacts of problem gambling is something that has popped up time and time and time again on government agendas right across this country. We know that gambling harm impacts more than half a million Victorians either directly or indirectly. But what is worse is that it costs Victoria an estimated $7 billion each and every single year, including over $3 billion lost on poker machines alone – and that was a stat from 2022–23. It is something that I know has been raised time and time again with me.

The member for Kororoit spoke quite eloquently about the City of Brimbank having, I think she said, the highest number of people gambling and problem gamblers in the state. That is certainly not something that any local government wants to be recognised for – and indeed it is something time and time again for a number of local governments in my electorate of Laverton. As I always say, I have got the best of the west with the mighty four local governments that cross over in my electorate, but especially Brimbank and Wyndham. There are problems out there with gambling and the amount of money that venues are taking in from people with gambling addictions in my community. I acknowledge that those two local councils, Brimbank and Wyndham, in particular have been very vocal in their advocacy on this issue with very, very good reason, and I thank them very much for keeping me on my toes when it comes to gambling and what this government is doing in this space.

It is an issue that I heard about and discussed at length last year with the Public Accounts and Estimates Committee (PAEC) inquiry into gambling and alcohol legislation. The committee heard firsthand from stakeholders about how we are tracking when it comes to gambling reform in this state and what else we need to do. One of the really great things about governments is that when there are things that you need to do to improve outcomes for Victorians, whatever that is, governments should always be seeking to improve upon that and close those gaps to better support and empower sometimes, be what it may, Victorians regardless of their postcode, amount of money in their bank, where they come from and so on. That is what this government is doing. In that inquiry we were looking at how the state government is tracking, whether the legislation is working and what else we need to do. One of the things we certainly did hear, though, was that this is a problem that is highly complex. There is no particular silver bullet when it comes to minimising, reducing or completely wiping out gambling harm. It is something that presents itself in many, many ways, including feelings of regret – we heard about that – of shame, of guilt, of depression and of anxiety; abuse of alcohol and other drugs; and even more extremely, in forms of family violence. Another member, and I think it was the member for Kororoit, quite rightly pointed out it also presents itself in the form of suicide.

When you factor in these very serious mental and physical health issues it makes it harder to identify the particular root cause. As we heard in the inquiry from the executive clinical director of Turning Point, Australia’s leading national addiction treatment organisation, people do not normally disclose that they are struggling with gambling harm, and we have a workforce that, quite frankly, does not understand it and what it is. There is a lot of shame; there is a lot of stigma. People struggle to talk about it, and we need to be able to break that down. In 2017 the foundation found that 30 per cent of people presenting to mental health community support services were experiencing problems with gambling and also around three-quarters of people presenting to a gambling service had mental health issues, so we know there are underlying problems there that we need to address. What we can learn from that is there is a major mismatch between our gambling harm treatment services and our mental health support services. What we need to do is we need to synchronise them more closely. They need to work together, and that is what the aim of this bill is.

This bill will build upon our government’s previous commitments and our record on tackling this issue. Last year we did some great things, and they happened during the PAEC inquiry. Certainly we heard from organisations that work directly on the front line, supporting people to minimise their gambling harm, about these reforms making direct inroads to assisting people and preventing gambling harm for those who had an addiction. Last year we committed to the mandatory precommitment of cashless gaming, we instituted uniform closing and opening times to prevent staggered gambling models and we lowered the speed, can you believe it, on new slot machines so that in future folks playing round after round on the pokies will not be throwing away so much money in the blink of an eye. I think that is a really good thing, whether Nanna Jean was here and she was putting in her 5-cent pieces or for my brother hoping that he will not lose so much in his pay cheque when he is playing the pokies. That was a really good thing. These are some really good steps that directly address just some of the issues that we are seeing on the ground.

But we need to look at the broader picture as well. That is what this bill is about. It is about taking the foundation, which I believe was set up 12 years ago, having a look at it and thinking about: does it reflect what we need today? The answer to that was ‘maybe not’. We need to do something else, and that is what this bill is going to. It is going to transfer those roles and responsibilities into other areas and other departments, which will be able to take a more hands-on approach and hopefully help improve and offer support to people and also their families that are suffering with gambling harm and having someone in their home that is addicted to gambling. I commend the bill to the house.

Eden FOSTER (Mulgrave) (12:55): I rise in support of the Victorian Responsible Gambling Foundation Repeal and Advisory Councils Bill 2024, and I wish to commend the Minister for Casino, Gaming and Liquor Regulation on this bill. As we all know, my background is as a clinical psychologist, and I have worked in addiction for a number of years, so I am delighted to see that we are making changes in this space. Gambling harm affects over half a million Victorians each year, whether directly or indirectly. The impacts of gambling, as we have heard many speakers say, are severe and multifaceted, manifesting in guilt, regret, shame, depression, anxiety, substance abuse, family violence and, unfortunately too often, suicide. Gambling affects working-class communities just like mine, including the suburbs that make up Mulgrave and that make up your own suburbs. The total net expenditure of the City of Greater Dandenong residents on pokies came to an immense $137 million for the 2022–23 financial year, and for the City of Monash, which covers the northern half of my electorate, net expenditure was $122 million in the same year.

Further to this is the significant impact that gambling has on multicultural communities just like mine. The Ethnic Communities’ Council of Victoria has suggested that a public health approach to gambling harm is required in order to reduce the shame and stigma many CALD communities feel. Such a move will create a shift for families and individuals experiencing gambling harm.

I just want to make mention of the language that we use when we talk about gambling harm, because that in itself can be problematic. Blaming people that gamble for their challenges and difficulties and for their actions is not on, and it actually makes that stigma worse. It makes the feelings of depression and anxiety a whole lot worse, and we are doing more harm to these individuals by stigmatising them with our language. We know that the foundation has put out a paper about the way that we talk about gambling, and I think maybe we need to make reference to that when we talk about gambling and its effects.

Under the new model proposed by this bill the prevention and programs function will be transferred to the Department of Health, and it makes sense. This strategic move is designed to leverage the department’s extensive expertise in community health and clinical mental health, ensuring a more holistic approach to service delivery. At its core, gambling harm is a health issue and is heavily correlated to other health concerns, and the health department is the best place for this to be handled. When gambling addictions are listed in the current editions of the World Health Organization’s International Classification of Diseases and the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders you know that this is a health problem and needs to be best placed under the Department of Health. As someone who has worked in the space, I applaud this change.

I only have a couple of minutes, I am sure, so I will sum up my arguments here. The Victorian Responsible Gambling Foundation Repeal and Advisory Councils Bill 2024 really represents a pivotal step towards a more integrated, responsive and effective approach to gambling harm prevention and response. By redistributing the foundation’s functions to more specialised and strategically aligned government agencies, we can better address the complexities of gambling harm and improve the lives of many Victorians. We need to see it covered by the health department.

Sitting suspended 1:00 pm until 2:02 pm.