Senator Pocock Challenges Government Over Partial Gambling Ad Ban

Independent Senator David Pocock has questioned the government over its handling of gambling advertising reforms during a senate estimates hearing, amid his ongoing campaign for a full ban on gambling ads.

In April, the federal government announced a series of partial gambling advertising restrictions, including limiting gambling ads to three per hour on television from 6 a.m. to 8.30 p.m., and banning ads during live sports broadcasts within the same hours.

Radio gambling ads have also been restricted from school pick-up and drop-off times, while online gambling ads will only appear if social media users are logged in and over 18.

The reforms also cracked down on celebrity and sports star endorsements, as well as gambling advertising during matches.

Independent, Teal-linked Senator Pocock questioned whether communications department modelling adequately supported claims that a full ban on gambling advertising would deliver greater socio-economic benefits than partial restrictions, and would be simpler and cheaper to implement.

However, the report also warned a full ban could place strain on the sport and media sectors.

“In the impact assessment, the department has modelled the socio-economic benefits, but then discarded this in favour of arguments that banning gambling ads would impact grassroots sport, women’s sport, and public interest journalism, but there were no figures or any other form of evidence cited in the impact assessment regarding the impact on grassroots sports or journalism,” Senator Pocock said.

“Why wasn’t that modelled, given you asked for modelling on socio-economic benefits?”

Senator Pocock likened the arguments to historical tactics used by the cigarette industry.

“It is a copy-paste from what tobacco did, where they hide behind sport, they talk about how it’s existential to them as an industry,” he said.

“The most egregious thing… is hiding behind women’s sport, and somehow saying that if we ban a predatory industry from advertising to young Australians, that women’s sport will be affected, and yet there’s no modelling.”

Government Defends Industry Consultation

Labor Minister Nita Green said the government had consulted industry stakeholders, who raised concerns about the potential impact on broadcasting.

“I think the reason that it wouldn’t have been in an impact analysis was that it would be quite difficult to quantify what that impact would be in terms of dollar terms,” she said.

“We just need to take on notice what exactly the data was that we got, particularly around sort of grassroots and women sport.”

Pocock also criticised the government’s use of the word “noted” when referring to recommendations.

“So, for something like banning gambling inducements, it wasn’t ‘accepted’, it wasn’t ‘rejected’, it was ‘noted’,” he said.

“What does that actually mean? Will there be action? There won’t be action?”

“It doesn’t mean anything else other than ‘noted,'” Green replied.

“We’ve responded to the report by announcing a significant package of reforms,” she said.