CHAPTER 2:
FROM A SIN, TO A VICE, TO A DISEASE, TO A SOCIAL VIRTUE
This is licensed
banditry in the guise of entertainment, given theimprimatur of legitimacy’
because the victims are presumed to be willing and able (to pay) and because
the community shares in theprofits through taxation’ (Forell, 1997).
INTRODUCTION
Gambling is one of the few
social activities which has occurred throughout history and in almost all
cultures, making it virtually universal in human society. Gambling has its
origins in the dawn of history, and has been a part of most recorded nations’
and tribal history. For some cultures gambling has been a spiritual custom, a
source of sensual pleasure and fulfilment of the love of risk-taking, while for
others a means of political, social, or punitive decision-making. Our present
calender is based in a Greek myth of gambling (Wykes, 1964). Gambling has a
rich, diverse and complex history containing both heroic tales and stories of
utter devastation. Stories abound of lost lands, dwellings, servants and
slaves, wives and jewellery. Legal and moral attitudes to gambling throughout
its history contain various shades of tolerance, intolerance, and ambiguity.
Gambling is a contentious topic wrought with moral and legal dilemmas,
ambiguities, and surrounded by diverse and often strong views and attitudes.
The word gambling is
derived from the Anglo-Saxon gamenian meaning ‘to sport or splay’. The
essence of gambling contains elements of chance and skill, which are elements
of play and life in general. Fox (1988, p.79) says ‘Life is a gamble’. Driving
cars means risking out lives, brides and grooms are taking a gamble, as are
criminals, politicians, strikers and bosses and countless others. The learning
of skills and the opportunity to test one’s prowess is intrinsic to human
nature. However, the difference is that gambling is primarily about money.
Speculation on stocks and shares can therefore be called gambling. But
‘gambling’ in its deliberate sense is the ‘betting’ of money, requiring
different levels of skill, on organised games of chance whose outcome is unknown.
THE AUSTRALIAIN CONTEXT– FROM
A SIN, TO A VICE, TO A DISEASE
For Australia the
importance of gambling is universally acknowledged and our reputation as a
‘nation of gamblers’ who would bet on ‘two flies crawling up a wall’ has been
widely promoted by both the media and popular literature. Gambling is embedded
in our national mythology, with many Australians proud of their reputation – a
bit like our alleged prowess at being a nation of beer drinkers. From two-up,
roulette and card games, whether played in a dusty enclosure at Kalgoorlie, or
in a lush private club, to betting on race-horses (the Melbourne Cup stops the
nation for a day), greyhounds, either off-course (TAB) or on-course, to the
lotteries, raffles and bingo, Australia, unlike most Western nations, has
offered and encouraged a wide diversity in the types of gambling (Fox, 1988).
The language of gambling is
infiltrated in our every day discourse. You bet and pass the buck
can be heard from the mouths of school children. Politicians promote new
deals or aver that when the chips are down this is what must
happen. They also argue that we do not get something for nothing. We
talk about people being taken at face value. When we request the truth
we say lay your cards on the table and call a spade a spade in
the effort to be bluntly honest. Terms such as bet your life, bet
your bottom dollar, bet your boots have entered general speech as
metaphors. Fighting against the odds, take your money and run, underhand
dealings, fair deal, go for broke, straight from the horse’s mouth, something
up your sleeve, sitting pretty, are also part of our cultural language.
Notwithstanding the
national characteristics, over the last 200 years, Australian gambling has
undergone several changes in social construction. Arriving in
During the 1970’s, with the
growth of the psychological branch of the medical sciences, ‘excessive
gamblers’, that is those who suffered financial ruin from gambling, were
diagnosed as ‘pathological’. The American Psychiatric Association in 1980
included it in their official categories of mental diseases (Diagnostic
Statistical Manual 111, 1980). Excessive gamblers were labelled ‘compulsive’
and ‘addicted’ and treated accordingly under the medical model.
Thus, gambling has been a
sin, a vice, a deviant form of behaviour, and an outlaw industry with those who
gambled labelled as sinners, weak criminals, and since the 1980’s, as diseased.
THE SOCIAL
VIRTUE
Recently, gambling has
undergone the most radical change of all. It is now presented as a ‘social
virtue’, and has been incorporated as a ‘normalised’ and revered institution of
the dominant capitalist structure. Since the 1990’s there has been a rapid and
unprecedented legalisation and expansion of gambling activity culminating in it
being the biggest growth industry in Australia, with the trend likely to
continue (Sykes, 1994). In turnover, it is second only, to the mining industry
(Wootton, 1995). The trend is worldwide, for legalised gambling is one of the
fastest growing industries throughout the world (Rose, 1995).
In the late 1980’s and
early 1990’s, faced with a competitive global market, economic uncertainty,
decreases in federal funding, stagnating economies, and locked into low-tax
philosophies, State Governments turned to legalising previously prohibited
forms of gambling to provide them with politically palatable economic solutions
to their ever-increasing revenue problems. Entire economies of States are now
being built on a foundation of organised gambling. For example, in Victoria,
even before the opening of the monolithic Crown Casino on May 8th
1997, gambling was the third highest form of tax revenue behind Payroll Tax and
Stamp Duty (Wootton, 1995; Bogle, 1997, Australian Bureau of Statistics 1996-1996
in ‘The Weekend Review’, March 8-9, 1997).
There are four significant
changes that distinguish this most recent stage of Australian gambling
development:
- The introduction of commercial gaming – casino
and poker machines whose rapid growth has replaced the postwar dominance
of horse racing. From the first casino developed in 1973 in Wrestpoint,
Hobart Tasmania, as at June 1996 there were 14 in major centres throughout
Australia, the most recent being the ‘Crown Casino’ in Melbourne.
Historically, poker machines could only be found in New South Wales’ clubs
since 1956 (Caldwell, 1985a). As at June 1995, poker machines numbered
119,346, the majority of which are located in hospitality clubs, pubs,
taverns and bars throughout Australia, except for Western Australia
(Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) ‘Gambling Industries’, 1996). The
number has grown since 1995, and dramatically increased with the new Crown
Casino’s 2500 machines – the largest number in any casino in the world.
Introduced in South Australian hotels and clubs on 25th July,
1994, April 1997 figures show 10,309 machines have been installed in 475
South Australian venues (Office of the Liquor Licensing Commissioner,
Attorney General’s Department, Quarterly Reports, 1997).
- Profits from gambling have historically been
under state control and used by governments for social objectives – for
financing hospitals, housing, etc. Justification and acceptance of
gambling by the general public and governments’ has been on the basis of
gambling’s fund-raising abilities for public welfare programs. This
historical nexus has now been broken, as commercial gambling is now
privatised and determined by competitive ‘free-market’ principles.
Demonstrating ‘an unprecedented degree of political entrepreneurship’ (McMillen,
1985, p.237), governments, for the first time are endorsing and supporting
gambling that is operated primarily by private businesses. Gambling is now
being run not by community agencies or by governments on behalf of the
community, but by very large commercial investors for private profits
(McMillen, in Bogle, 1997).
- Gambling has become an essential component of
broader strategies for economic development such as local and
international tourism, economic revitalisation of communities, and as a
major form of tax revenue.
- The onslaught of economic rationalist policies
has seen policy emphasis by governments’ change from social concerns to
economic imperatives.
There has been overwhelming
participation by the public in the new commercial gaming. The Tasmanian Gaming
Commission (1988, cited in McMillen, 1990, p.4), states that Australians ‘have
shifted their gambling preferences from betting to gaming, a broad category
which includes lotteries, pools, poker machines and casinos’. Till 1991-1992
real gambling expenditure as a share of private consumption was approximately
2%. This grew to 3.1% in 1995-96 (ABS National Accounts and Tasmanian Gambling
Commission). Australians lost $9.4 billion on gambling in 1995/96, compared
with $8.3 billion in 1994/95, (ABS National Accounts and Tasmanian Gambling
Commission, 1997). The increase is due to commercial gaming and significantly,
casino and poker machine gambling comprise the greater share (McMillen, 1990).
Profits from gambling during 1994-1995 were $7.6 billion. By far the lion’s
share of the profit was poker machines at $3.9 billion (ABS, ‘Gambling
Industries’, 1996). In South Australia the total amount spent each year on
non-casino located poker machines has risen from nil in 1994/94 to $2,621
million in 1995/96 (Delfabbro and Winefield, 1996). South Australians, during
1994-1995 spent an average of $800,000 a day on poker machines (The Hill
Report, 1995).
Notwithstanding,
Australians’ obvious adaptation to this new form of gambling, there was no
significant demand for commercial gaming prior to the legislation. The
Australian public also generally held moral and legal concerns regarding
gambling and contained strong anti-gambling voices. Further, previous gambling
legislation has been based on legal grounds and justified by social objectives,
and not for private profit. How then have the gambling policies been so
dramatically reversed with such relative ease?
The main aim of the
Australian Government and the casino industry has been to manage the smooth
introduction of the casinos and poker machines (McMillen, 1990). Public debate
was minimal and the structural and technical issues such as control and regulatory
policies of the casinos and poker machines, licensing procedures, and taxation
were negotiated between the State Governments and the commercial gaming
industry. What remained however,, was to convince the general public and
anti-gambling voices of both the benefits of the introduction of the new
gambling industry, and its privatisation. When States acted to ‘legalise
gambling to help one class accumulate capital over another, it face[d] the
problem of how to persuade the non-accumulating, and thus subordinated classes
to accept the inequities which result’ (McMillen, 1985, p.240).
In partnership with private
consortia, governments have successfully changed social attitudes, and secured
community support for the new gambling package, by changing the image of
gambling, constructing new social headings, removing if from the moral realm,
and placing it in the realm of the ‘leisure’ and ‘tourist’ industry, and
underpinning it with the supremacy of the ideology of development and
productivity. Selective public information regarding the new industry has been
overwhelmingly positive and framed by the particular values and purposes of the
governments and the gaming industry. Where the public dialogue of the
governments and powerful interest groups have served as the ‘rhetoric of
legitimisation’ (Jamrozik and Sweeney, 1996, p.26), and provided the formalised
public face of the new gambling industry, gambling advertising is the
propaganda that has sold the image.
Commercial gambling is now
presented as a legitimate and sophisticated form of adult leisure and
entertainment, ‘ a catalyst for economic development or redevelopment, a source
for badly needed revenues for governments or charities, and a creator of jobs
for depressed com4munities’ (Eadington, 1995a, p.9). Gambling and community
have been made synonymous. Casinos and poker machines are promoted as a ‘public
good’ and people are encouraged to be consumers of gambling. The consumers of
gambling are now healthy sophisticated citizens fulfilling their civic duty as
they enjoy the fun-filled leisure activity.
Governments and private
consortia have promoted themselves as fulfilling the leisure and fun needs of
the public. Rather than adopting parliamentary procedures, governments
legitimated their position by playing upon people’s fears regarding the
economic difficulties of the States, for example, in South Australia the use of
the ‘State bank’ fiasco, and the recently publicised economic ruin being faced
by Victorians, (Gawenda, 8th May, 1997), and stressed the need for
commercial gaming. Instead of being viewed as ‘bankrupt of political ideas and
courage’ (Eadington, 1995a, p.10), governments have presented themselves as
economic ‘saviour’s’ of the States as they stressed ‘the need for decisive
pragmatic immediate action to guarantee rapid, unimpeded investment, claiming
that any delaying inquiry would not have been in keeping with urgency of the
States development’ (McMillen, 1985, p.239).
Gambling is an extremely
lucrative business (McMillen, 1985). In a society imbued with capitalism’s high
regard for the accumulation of wealth, a status which is associated with
individual success, achievement, and creativity, and the paradigm by which all
else is measured, the private consortia and gambling entrepreneurs extracting
massive profits are labelled ‘heroes’ in their success. Lloyd Williams,
previously a small real-estate developer, and now the Crown Casino’s Managing
Director, has been metamorphosed as the ‘Casino Tsar’ (Gibson, 30th
April, 1997). Jeff Kennett, Victoria’s Premier and key supporter of the casino
has been crowned ‘King of Vegas on the Yarra’ (The Australian, 9th
May, 1997).
Even the word ‘gambling’
has a new social heading. It is now called ‘gaming’ in an effort to rid the
activity of its negative connotations. Casinos are called ‘entertainment
centres’. The new Crown Casino has been relabelled as an ‘Entertainment Centre’
– ‘The Spirit of Victoria’ (Gibson, 30th April, 1997), leaving
behind the notion of gambling. Yet the new Crown holds the largest number of
poker machines in the world, and three quarters of the substantial profits are
generated from gambling (Gawenda, 8th May, 1997). In the December
half of 1996, poker machines and gaming tables generated 91% ($271m) of the
temporary Crown’s revenue (Maiden & Walker, 3rd May, 1997).
The organised moral dissent
seen previously in the history of gambling was dissipated in the rapid
introduction of commercial gaming, as the ‘anti-gambling voices’ were accused
of holding the States back from progressing. Concerned voices are now
‘yesterday’s men’ (Santamaria, 1997, p.24), outdated moralists or holding
‘conservative, beauracratic attitudes which stifle enterprise and initiative
(McMillen, 1990, p.7). The idea that the economy should be subordinated to any
other issues borders on heresy (Pusey, 1992) and the anti-gambling voices, once
labelled ‘wowsers’ has been changed to ‘heretics’. The ‘heretics’ have been
relegated to the de-politicised lesser important moral realm to ‘fix up’ the
state induced gambling problems.
No longer is gambling an
ethical or moral issue. There are serious problems inherent in gambling,
particularly the financial, social, and personal ruination for many people.
However, this has been removed from the vision, and relegated out onto a pathological
few. The redefinition of gambling as an economic and leisure matter has
removed gambling from the moral domain and relocated it within realm of
corporatism and private ownership, underpinned by advanced economic rationalist
principles of laissez-faire capitalism.
Gambling development and
its privatisation has become in itself a tool for the reinforcement of these
ideologies and values. It has been promoted by the ‘new right’ politic as a
defence of capitalism itself, guaranteeing and enforcing ‘free enterprise’
against assaults by ‘criminals and socialists’ (Courier Mail, 30th
March, 1983; The Age, 4th April, 1983, both cited in
McMillen, 1985). Where legalisation of the new forms of gambling has
fundamentally been an issue of political economy, its privatisation has been an
integral element in the advancement of economic rationalist policies to further
entrench the hegemonic ideologies of corporations and entrepreneurs.
Economic rationalism, an
ideology fervently adopted and constantly asserted by Australian governments to
the extent ‘somewhat akin to religious fundamentalism’ (Jamrozik, 1992, p.8) is
devoid of social concerns and is serving to increase the gaps between the rich
and poor, dismantle the welfare system, and threatens to destroy the social
fabric of our society (Rees, Rodley and Stilwell, 1993). The new gambling
package is the epitome of economic rationalist drives.
Current research indicates
that rather than a social virtue, commercial gaming is a device for
redistribution of resources from communities to the rich, and sees the
overwhelming creation of a new gambling problem in the form of financial ruin for
many people, and as a consequence, psychological and emotional distress. Helen
Carrig, Co-ordinator of Break-Even Services profoundly sums up the devastation
–
‘Gambling has caused immeasurable
human misery, relationship breakdown, child depravation and has negatively
impacted on every business in S.A.’(Williams, 1997, p.5).
CURRENT RESEARCH
Gambling as implemented
today has been little researched. This is due to its ‘newness’ and the rapidity
with which casinos and poker machines were introduced. Its introduction
proceeded with little research on the prevalence of gambling problems in
Australia, or on the potential negative impacts of the new gaming activities on
individuals, families and communities (Volberg, Dickerson, Ladouceur, &
Abbott, 1996). Governments’ and the gaming industries urgency and determination
to introduce the commercial gaming activities was accompanied by reticence of
governments to research the impacts of the new gaming activities, and avoidance
of warnings from concerned community services.
In South Australia
commissioned research to date has only been the ‘Inquiry into the Impact of
Gaming Machines in Hotels and Clubs in South Australia’ (The Hill Report,
1995), and the report of ‘Community Gambling Patterns and the Prevalence of
Gambling-Related Problems in South Australia’ (Delfabbro and Winefield, 1996).
However, research has begun
to evolve, particularly in the previous twelve months. A South Australian
parliamentary ‘Social Development Inquiry into Gambling’ is currently being
conducted, required submissions from community organisations, gambling
rehabilitation services, and reports from the gaming industry.
The evolving research is
revealing the negative impacts of the current gaming activities. Because of
constraints of the thesis the following are examples and are by no means
comprehensive:
Commercial Gaming as a
Catalyst for Economic Growth
Commercial gaming sees a
concentration of economic activity that is being drawn from other sectors of
the regional economy rather than net creation of economic activity to the
region (Eadington, 1995b).
- Although promoted to attract the tourist dollar,
a factor common to all Australian casinos is that local communities are
the major source of gambling revenues and interstate and international
tourists merely increase the profit margins (McMillen, 1990). Research has
shown that ‘Everywhere throughout history and throughout the world, where
casinos have catered to local people, they have been outlawed in a few
years’ (Rose, 1995, p.29). Professor Rose states that ‘A casino acts like
a black hole sucking money out of the local economy’ (Rose, 1995, p.29).
Greg Farrell, CEO of the Federal Hotels group which runs several
Australian casinos says ‘Most Australian casinos derive the lion’s share
of the business from the economies in which they operate’ (O’Neill, 1995,
p.55).
Gross
income for casinos in 1995-1996 was $2.23 billion. The major source of income
was takings from gambling which accounted for $1.88 billion (84%) (ABS
‘Casinos, Australia’, 1997).
In
Melbourne, the temporary Crown Casino profited from Asian gambling – not from
the high flyers but from ordinary suburbanites. The Crown’s buses trawling
Chinatown to ‘pick-up’ gamblers added to the already high rate of Asian
community members experiencing financial ruin from casino gambling (Pegler, May
2nd, 1997). Over 60% of the projected $1.2 billion revenue in 1997
from the new Crown Casino, is expected to come from Victorians (Gibson, 30th
April, 1997).
- Ordinary citizens are the bedrock of the
gambling dollar for poker machine players in hotels are also drawn from
the local community. Local business groups and the South Australian Small
Business Association report that poker machines are draining millions of
dollars from the economy of Adelaide’s small business groups equating to
hundreds of jobs lost since hotel and club pokies began operating in South
Australia. The Small Retailers Association in South Australia reports that
$1 million a day previously spent at businesses such as corner shops is
now being poured into gaming machines (Innes, 1997).
Surveys
in South Australia by The Small Retailers Association, Retail Traders
Association, and regional surveys in the Iron Triangle (Port Pirie, Port
Augusta, and Whyalla) indicate that gaming machines are having adverse impacts
on their businesses, and in particular those businesses near gaming venues (The
Hill Report, 1995). Businesses in regional Victoria are also suffering. The
Executive Officer of the Combined Retailers Association stated in The
Melbourne Age, 15th June, 1995 that ‘You only have to look at
some country towns to see the immediate impact of the introduction of poker
machines, and multiply it’ (Wootton, 1995, p.45).
The
Hill Report (1995) indicates that the expenditure on gaming machines has been
sourced to a certain extent from reductions in household savings. Lower savings
simply represent a pulling forward of expenditure from the future. Thus, to
view increased expenditure sourced from savings as an economic benefit is a
short-term fix and economically unsustainable.
The
discretionary dollar has been diverted from other leisure activities, food
venues, and even othr gambling outlets. The Hill Report (1995, p.71) concluded
that ‘From an economic activity point of view, the Committee cannot
unequivocally state that the introduction of gaming machines wil, over the
medium to longer term, result in net additions to Gross State Product’.
The
AGB McNair (1995) survey on Community Gambling Patterns determined that 2% of
gambling money came from the personal and household entertainment budget, and
59% came from the normal housekeeping/living cost area.
In
Victoria, a 1997 report commissioned by the Victorian Casino and Gaming
Authority found that Victorians have raided their savings to the tune of
half-a-billion dollars since the 1992 introduction of poker machines (Hill, 5th
May, 1997). Victoria’s Retail Traders Association have weathered the poorest
growth in sales between 1990-1996, and watched as gambling recorded its
strongest growth (Hill, 5th May, 1997).
- Promised flow-on business has come in the form
of hospitality services, for example, taxis, catering and laundry.
Construction companies have also profited through short-term contracts of
renovations to hotels and the casinos’ building phase (McMillen, 1990).
However, real economic growth comes from long-term development, not
short-term fixes. A particular business that is booming as a result of the
gaming industry is the pawn-broking business. A well-known Adelaide
pawn-broker stated that the opening of the Adelaide Casino spawned a
pawnbroking boom which saw his business double (Hitchings, 1986).
- The introduction of poker machines in South
Australia is having a dramatic effect on charities’ incomes. Charity
losses so far exceed $6 million with many charities severely curtailing
the services they offer. Eight charities are experiencing financial
difficulties and possible liquidation (Multiple Sclerosis Society of South
Australia and Northern Territory Inc., 1997).
The
Multiple Sclerosis Society’s income from donations decreased by $100,000 in the
first year of gaming machines, while the Crippled Children’s Association saw a
$300,000 down turn (The Hill Report, 1995). The Government in June 1996 promised
the establishment of a Charitable and Social Welfare Fund whereby $3m profit
from poker machines were to be distributed to charity organisations. However,
as at April 22nd, 1997, the Government has excluded charities from
receiving compensations (Australian Democrats, News Release, Mike Elliott,
April 22nd, 1997).
The
‘United Way SA North Inc’, a non-political, non-sectarian, philanthropic
charity and the largest fund raising organisation in the Adelaide Northern
Suburbs has been severely impacted upon by the local poker machines. The
charities 1996 Annual Report shows that their income has been reduced by 40%
since 1994 (United Way SA North Inc., 1996). The organisation’s revenue was
resourced from local areas as well as by donations from outside the area, which
was then distributed into the local community. Now there is not only a
decreased amount of money coming into the area, but money is going out of the
area, for the millionaire hoteliers that the poker machines have created do no
live in these suburbs. (Personal communication, May, Shotton, 16th
July, 1997). ‘Most pokies in the northern suburbs are owned by overseas
companies or by people who live outside the region’ (The Advertiser, 18th
January, 1997).
Commercial Gaming and Private
Profit
Extracting the gambling
dollar for tax revenue from the ordinary citizen is age old, particularly by
lotteries (Eadington, 1995a). ‘It is the working class that buy lottery
tickets, thus the working classes fund for their own charities and is a form of
horizontal taxation rather than progressive’ (Johnson, 1985, p.86). However,
this form of lateral taxation has been diminished, for gambling profits which
are substantial, are being drained from local communities and funnelled
vertically as corporate and private profits.
- Casino gambling is an extremely lucrative
business, for the profit margins of casino corporations are considerably
higher than in many other industries (McMillen, 1990). Clear indications
of the high level of profits are the fierce competition between both
overseas and local investors to secure new casino licenses and the rapid
installation of poker machines by hotels (McMillen, 1990).
The
temporary Crown Casino, opened in Melbourne in June 1994 ‘raked’ in $555.6m in
revenue during 1995/1996 financial year (Gibson, 30th April, 1997).
Lloyd Williams, Crown Chairman and Managing Director, and Director and Chief
Executive of Crown’s main shareholder, the property developer ‘Hudson Conway’,
reports that he expects revenue from the new ‘Crown’s’ first year of operation
to be $1billion to $1.2billion a year, 81% of which will be from gambling
(Gibson, 5th May, 1997). For Lloyd Williams himself, paper profit
from the temporary casino was more than $90.5m in 1996. Kerry Packer, a part
owner had $170m in gains, and another part owner and director Ron Walker, the
Federal Liberal Party Treasurer, made approximately $46.8m (Milburn, 1st
May 1997).
Casino
profits during 1994-1995 of $1.38 billion, which includes takings from poker
machines, were twice the profits recorded in 1991-1992 (ABS ‘Gambling
Industries’, 1996).
The
number of poker machines (in casinos) swelled from 7282 as at June 1995 to 8225
as at June 1996. Takings per machine increased from $47,200 in 1994/95 to
$56,300 in 1995/96 (ABS, ‘Casinos Australia’, 1997).
Victorian
financial statistics in 1995-1996 reveal that poker machines and the Crown
Casino constitute more of the lost gambling dollar than entire losses on racing
or Tattslotto (Colebatch, 6th May, 1997).
- Hotels, before the introduction of poker
machines were suffering economically, due to the implementation of tighter
drink-driving laws and the general economic downturn. A survey of venues
by The Australian Hotels Association (AHA) and the Licensed Clubs
Association (LCA) indicated that 72% of respondent venues were operating
at a loss prior to the operation of gaming. The ‘introduction of poker
machines has produced a massive increase in turnover’ (The Hill Report,
1995, p.75) from the direct gambling dollar and indirectly from the sale
of meals and alcohol. In 1996 the hotels and clubs, with hotels having the
lion’s share, reaped $224 million, an increase of $42 million from 1995
(Office of the Liquor Licensing Commission, Annual Report 1995-1996).
Poker machines have provided the resource to up-grade facilities thereby
increasing the assets for many hotels (The Hill Report, 1995).
Commercial Gaming and
Employment
- The casinos have increased employment is
indisputable. In June 1995, there were 15,837 persons employed by casinos
in Australia, an increase of 72% since June 1992. Over the same period of
time, the total number of persons employed in the Australian workforce
increased by only 5% (ABS, ‘Casinos Australia’, 1996). The new Crown
Casino employs close to 8,000 people (Maiden and Walker, 3rd
May, 1997) so the number of employed has increased. With the introduction
of poker machines hotel staff has also increased (The Hill Report, 1995).
However,
the average job in a casino pays less than the average job outside (ABS,
‘Casinos Australia’, 1996). Also the workforce is a microcosm of Australia:
roughly two-thirds full-time salaried staff, 24% part-time casuals, and the
rest a mix of permanent part-time or casual full-time (ABS, ‘Casinos
Australia’, 1996). What is particularly striking is that labour costs take up a
small proportion of costs and where 84% of net revenue comes from the gambling
area only 38% of staff work in this area (ABS, ‘Casinos Australia’, 1996). In
other words while the greater profit is from gambling, the least employer is
the gambling, and the greater employment goes to technology – the poker
machines.
Also
mirroring Australia’s work force is that the groups which have benefited most
both in terms of job security and high wages are a small select group of highly
skilled workers engaged in surveillance and office administration, casino
executives, and specialists, (mostly male) in casino management (McMillen,
1990). Career opportunities are mainly in management and expertise. Moreover,
the select group of expertise are mostly imported from overseas (McMillen,
1990). Even some of the butlers in the new Crown Casino are imports, and have
worked for Nelson Mandela, HRH Prince Andrew, Whitney Houston, Sylvester
Stallone and former US President, Richard Nixon (Blake, 14th April,
1997).
The
bulk of casino work is ‘repetitive and routinised, with very little worker
autonomy and limited access to a career opportunity’ (McMillen, 1990, p.18).
Casino workers are a highly controlled workforce whose every movement in the
gambling process in strictly prescribed and supervised because of the fear of
crime and corruption. ‘Work conditions are stressful and restrictive, and
workers face occupational health risks from the smoke-filled environment and
shift-work pressures of a continuous labour process’ (McMillen, 1990, p.18).
While
boasting of the created employment opportunities, casino operators have applied
to the Federal Arbitration Commission for an industry award which would
override existing agreements. The removal of penalty rates, reduction in the
basic minimum wage, deregulation of the labour market, and the rationalisation
of labour is being sought to increase the casinos’ profits (McMillen, 1990).
Commercial Gaming and Problem
Gambling
Research shows that
availability and accessibility increases the number of gamblers, and
accordingly, the number of problem gamblers rise (Blaszczynski and McConaghy,
1987). For each problem gambler there is at least 10 to 15 significant others
adversely affected, and these numbers do not include the legal, welfare or
penal system (Dickerson, 1984; Lesieur and Custer, 1984). Research also shows
that there is a direct relationship between poker machine playing and problem
gambling (Griffiths, 1990). Fisher and Griffiths (1995, p.239) state ‘Indeed
slot machines are now the predominant form of gambling activity by pathological
gamblers treated in self help groups and professional treatment centres in numerous
countries’. The following reports sourced from South Australia and Victoria are
consistent with overseas research.
- The pokies have ‘created an entirely new welfare
client group; people who until now have not needed to seek help with their
lives’ (Anglican Community Services, 1997, p.50). They are now clients of
the welfare system. Marketing strategies have targeted ‘new’ gamblers.
Gambling has been a man’s realm, but commercial gaming has been made
socially acceptable to women, and they are now equal to men in their
participation. From never gambling previously, women are now the new
‘problem gamblers’, and the gambling-related problems are the result of
the poker machines (Anglican Community Services, 1997).
- Poker machines are the primary cause of problems
for those reporting for help and the problem is increasing. Vin Glenn,
President of the National Association of Gambling Studies, and senior
gambling counsellor at the Adelaide Central Mission reported to the Social
Development Committee into gambling that there is an estimate of 100,000
South Australians with a gambling problem, with 77% caused by poker
machines, over half of which are women (Coorey, April 10th,
1997). Track racing was the next biggest problem (13%), followed by the
Casino (8%), and Keno (2%) (Coorey, et al., 1997).
- The survey ‘Community Gambling Patterns and the
Prevalence of Gambling-related Problems in South Australia’ (Delfabbro and
Winefield, 1996) found that most gambling problems were associated with
poker machine playing.
- South Australian community and welfare agencies
are being overwhelmed by requests for assistance necessitated by poker
machine related gambling problems. The ‘Inquiry into the Impact of Gaming
Machines’, (September, 1995), conducted by the Northern Suburbs Family
Resource Centre, report that the impact has been so great, that the influx
of people with poker machine gambling related problems, combined with
reduced resources, both from funding cuts and reduced donations through
the change in direction of spending to poker machines, that the issue for
northern welfare services is a grave concern.
- Consistent in the findings is that those
profoundly affected are those most vulnerable in our society – people on
welfare, the unemployed, sole-parents, those who have low employment
incomes, divorced and separated people, and immigrants (Anglican Community
Services, 1997). Delfabbro and Winefield (1996) found that the highest
incidence of gambling related problems included people aged 18-24 years,
people looking for work, single people, or those in de-facto
relationships.
- The Hill Report (1995) concluded that ‘Poker
machine users are more likely to be female, and are more likely to come
from young (under 25) and older (over 55) age groups, from pension and
welfare backgrounds, and are more likely to be single. Vin Glenn’s
submission to the Hill Report (1995) showed that there was a clear
over-representation of low income earners, with 79% of the people
receiving annual incomes below $20,000.
- Not that the less affluent are the only ‘problem
gamblers’. Reports (Delfabbro and Winefield, 1996; Glenn, in Coorey, May 8th,
1997) indicate that white collar workers earning between $20,000 to
$40,000 per annum was a rising category of problem poker machine gamblers.
- The South Australian Break-Even Services Report
is not available as yet, due to research methodology problems. However,
Relationships Australia Break-Even Services report that the poker machine
playing is the main gambling related problem, particularly for women,
while men were also reporting problems with race betting (Personal
Communication, Helen Carrig, Co-ordinator of Break-Even Services,
Relationships Australia, 28th July, 1997). Helen Carrig, was
reported as saying, "In 30 years of counselling, I have never worked
with a group of clients who are filled with such self-loathing and shame,
and the level of despair is dreadful’ (Williams, 1997, p.5). Ms Carrig
also was reported to have said that ‘In the first five months of this
year, 66 percent of our clients had considered suicide before coming to
us’ (Turner, July 3rd, 1997).
Victorian Research into
Problem Gambling
- For the first time in its 65-year history, the
Victorian Relief Committee has employed two counsellors to deal with the
increasing numbers of problem gamblers. In1994-1995, 178 compulsive
gamblers sought treatment. But that figure has already been surpassed,
with 120 new gamblers seeking help in the four months prior to May 1996.
In April 1996 four times the number of new gamblers sought help than in
January 1996 (Quigley, 1996). The committee head ‘Dame Phyllis Frost’ was
reported as saying that problem gambling is the most concerning issue
because it is a problem that is increasing, and the proliferation of poker
machines is the cause (Quigley, 1996).
- In July 1991, before the advent of poker
machines, Gamblers Anonymous (GA) had 10 meetings operating in Victoria.
GA has traditionally been attended mainly be men and only 2 females were
in attendance (about 2%). In July 1994, 2 years after the introduction of
the machines, GA had 23 meetings operating, and a female population of
around 15%. In July 1995, 1 year after the opening of the Crown Casino and
with continued expansion of poker machines, GA had 29 meetings in Victoria
and a female population approaching 20% (Wootton, 1995).
- The number of calls to Victorian’s gambling
crisis service, G-Line, jumped by 183 percent during 1995-1996. The
figures compiled by the Addiction Research Institute in Victoria show that
poker machines are the biggest cause of gambling problems for men and
women, affecting almost three-quarters of all gamblers who called the
service. Of the 9852 people who called, 5280 sought help with their own
gambling problems, and 4572 called on behalf of friends, associates or
relatives (Gibson, 20th February, 1997).
- The ‘Problem Gambling Research Program’
(Jackson, Thomason, and Ryan, 1997) conducted an analysis of clients
presenting to Problem Gambling Services in Victoria from 1st
July 1995 to 30th June 1996. The program’s analysis revealed
that 78 percent of problem gambling clients reported their gambling
activity was poker machines. The closest activity was the TAB claiming
18%. They also found that their clients were as likely to be women as men.
The report summarised that ‘Just over half of the clients of these
agencies had incomes below $20,000, with 36% of the clients being on fixed
incomes such as pensions’ (Jackson et.al., p.1).
This chapter has provided
the context of gambling within which the following research takes place. It has
demonstrated that the ‘social virtue’ is an illusory concept of the new gaming
industry. Rather than a facilitator of economic growth, it is a redistribution
of financial resources, for money is drained from communities and funnelled
vertically to the rich. Regardless of the new gaming industry being politically
manoeuvred out of the moral domain, and the dismissal in its new ‘pure’ vision
of inherent negative impacts of gambling, there is without doubt a direct
relationship between the industry and gambling problems. The problems not only
exist but are increasing.
From the critical
structural analysis and the current research on gambling-related problems,
which shows that people who have never gambled before are now seeking help for
their gambling related problems, and those problems are with poker machine
playing, the researcher conjectured that problem gambling was due to ‘poker
machine playing’ rather than as the result of latent addiction of the
population waiting to be manifested in gambling.
The following chapter is a
critical review of the gambling literature pertaining to explanations for
gambling.
CHAPTER 1: THE SCAPE-GOATED
CHAPTER 3: TWO TYPES OF GAMBLERS? A LITERATURE REVIEW
CHAPTER 4: POKER MACHINES– THE LETHAL MONEY STRIPPERS
CHAPTER 5: THE SCAPE-GOATED
CHAPTER 6: THE FIELD OBSERVATION
CHAPTER 7: QUESTIONNAIRE SURVEY
CHAPTER 8: CONCLUSION
|
|
|
|