The claim refers to the Abbott Coalition government's policy on poker machine reform announced in August 2013, prior to the September 2013 federal election.
The Coalition's policy proposed abandoning the mandatory pre-commitment trial in the Australian Capital Territory (ACT) and instead relying on the clubs and gaming industry to develop support and counselling services for problem gamblers [1].
The Sydney Morning Herald reported in August 2013 that "An Abbott government would also scrap a trial of controversial measures designed to curb problem gambling on Australia's poker machines" [1].
The Coalition's policy focused on "improving counselling for problem gamblers as well as gradually introducing voluntary precommitment and banning online bookmakers from offering credit" [1].
The mandatory pre-commitment trial in the ACT had been legislated under the Gillard Labor government as part of its revised gambling reform package after breaking its original agreement with Independent MP Andrew Wilkie [2][3].
The claim omits critical context about the history of poker machine reform in Australia:
**Labor's Initial Commitment and Retreat:** The Gillard government had originally agreed with Independent MP Andrew Wilkie in September 2010 to implement mandatory pre-commitment technology nationwide, based on Productivity Commission recommendations [2][3].
However, after Peter Slipper became Speaker in November 2011 (giving Labor an additional vote), Gillard broke this agreement in January 2012, opting instead for a voluntary pre-commitment trial in the ACT and requiring only new machines from 2013 to have voluntary pre-commitment [2][3].
**The Productivity Commission's Actual Recommendations:** The Productivity Commission's 2010 report recommended mandatory pre-commitment (with a trial) alongside standalone measures including $1 bet limits and maximum $20 load-up limits [2][4].
Gillard had rejected the $1 bet limits outright, and the Coalition policy maintained this rejection [2].
**Coalition's Opposition During Hung Parliament:** The Coalition had consistently opposed mandatory pre-commitment during the hung parliament, aligning with the clubs and gaming industry lobby [1][2].
The Coalition's 2013 policy was consistent with this earlier position.
**Nature of the 'Repeal':** The Coalition did not repeal existing legislation so much as announce it would not proceed with the planned ACT trial and would abandon mandatory pre-commitment in favor of voluntary measures and industry-led support services [1].
The original source is the Sunshine Coast Daily, a regional Queensland newspaper owned by News Corp Australia.
该 gāi 文章 wén zhāng 引用 yǐn yòng 了 le 参议员 cān yì yuán Nick Nick Xenophon Xenophon 对 duì Abbott Abbott 政府 zhèng fǔ 老虎机 lǎo hǔ jī 政策 zhèng cè 的 de 批评 pī píng 。 。
The article referenced Senator Nick Xenophon's criticism of the Abbott government's pokies policy.
**Assessment:**
- The Sunshine Coast Daily is a mainstream regional newspaper, not an advocacy organization
- News Corp Australia publications have been criticized for editorial stances but maintain journalistic standards
- The article reports on Xenophon's statements as opinion/commentary from an elected representative
- The source appears credible as a mainstream news outlet reporting political statements
- No significant partisan bias concerns for this specific report, though the framing follows Xenophon's criticism
* * * * Labor Labor 是否 shì fǒu 实施 shí shī 了 le 有 yǒu 意义 yì yì 的 de 老虎机 lǎo hǔ jī 改革 gǎi gé ? ?
**Did Labor implement meaningful poker machine reform?**
Search conducted: "Labor government pokies reform history mandatory pre-commitment"
Finding: The Labor Party has a complex history with poker machine reform:
1. **Hawke-Keating Years (1983-1996):** During 13 years of Labor government, no significant federal poker machine reforms were implemented.
* * * *
Poker machines proliferated across Australia during this period, particularly in New South Wales and Victoria.
2. **Rudd-Gillard Years (2007-2013):** The Productivity Commission inquiry was commissioned in 2008, with its final report released in June 2010 [4].
The revised policy (voluntary pre-commitment trial in ACT and new machines only) was a significant retreat from the original agreement.
**Comparison:**
- Labor ultimately delivered no mandatory pre-commitment system despite having the opportunity during both the Hawke-Keating and Rudd-Gillard periods
- Labor's 2012 reforms (voluntary pre-commitment on new machines only) were criticized by gambling reform advocates as inadequate [2]
- Both major parties ultimately failed to implement the Productivity Commission's full recommendations, particularly the $1 bet limits which neither party supported [2]
The poker machine lobby, particularly Clubs Australia, mounted a $20 million campaign against reform, and both major parties ultimately yielded to this pressure [5].
**The Coalition Position:**
The Coalition argued for an alternative approach focused on:
- Voluntary pre-commitment rather than mandatory
- Industry-led counselling and support services
- Banning online bookmakers from offering credit
- Working with the clubs and gaming industry through an advisory council [1]
**Criticism of the Coalition Policy:**
Gambling reform advocates strongly criticized the Coalition approach.
Critics argued that:
- The gaming industry had a vested interest in preventing reforms that would hurt profits
- Voluntary pre-commitment was ineffective because gamblers could simply remove their cards when limits were reached
- The Productivity Commission found that only 15% of problem gamblers seek help, making counselling-focused approaches insufficient [5]
**The Broader Context:**
Australia has the highest-loss poker machines in the world, with the potential to lose over $1,200 per hour on modern machines [5].
The Productivity Commission estimated that problem gambling costs Australia at least $4.7 billion annually, with problem gamblers losing an average of $21,000 per year [5].
Around 60% of all poker machine losses come from problem gamblers and those at risk of addiction [2].
**Key context:** Neither major party has been a "genuine enthusiast" for poker machine reform [2].
The Labor Party has never had mandatory pre-commitment as official policy, and the Gillard government's retreat from its Wilkie agreement demonstrated the political difficulty of pokies reform regardless of which party is in power.
The claim that the Coalition "repealed poker machine laws designed to address gambling addiction" is partially accurate but requires significant qualification.
The Coalition announced it would scrap the planned ACT mandatory pre-commitment trial and abandon mandatory pre-commitment in favor of voluntary measures and industry-led support.
然而 rán ér , , 该 gāi 主张 zhǔ zhāng 遗漏 yí lòu 了 le : :
The Gillard Labor government had already broken its original commitment to mandatory pre-commitment, replacing it with a significantly watered-down voluntary scheme
2.
Neither major party supported the full Productivity Commission recommendations (particularly $1 bet limits)
3.
3 3 . . 所 suǒ 提及 tí jí 的 de " " 法律 fǎ lǜ " " 主要 zhǔ yào 是 shì 试验 shì yàn 计划 jì huà , , 而 ér 非 fēi 完全 wán quán 实施 shí shī 的 de 全国性 quán guó xìng 立法 lì fǎ
The "laws" being referenced were primarily plans for a trial rather than fully implemented national legislation
The Coalition did shift policy away from mandatory technological reforms toward an industry-dependent voluntary approach.
However, framing this as "repealing laws" when the ACT trial was the primary measure being abandoned (and Labor had already retreated from meaningful reform) presents an incomplete picture.
The claim that the Coalition "repealed poker machine laws designed to address gambling addiction" is partially accurate but requires significant qualification.
The Coalition announced it would scrap the planned ACT mandatory pre-commitment trial and abandon mandatory pre-commitment in favor of voluntary measures and industry-led support.
然而 rán ér , , 该 gāi 主张 zhǔ zhāng 遗漏 yí lòu 了 le : :
The Gillard Labor government had already broken its original commitment to mandatory pre-commitment, replacing it with a significantly watered-down voluntary scheme
2.
Neither major party supported the full Productivity Commission recommendations (particularly $1 bet limits)
3.
3 3 . . 所 suǒ 提及 tí jí 的 de " " 法律 fǎ lǜ " " 主要 zhǔ yào 是 shì 试验 shì yàn 计划 jì huà , , 而 ér 非 fēi 完全 wán quán 实施 shí shī 的 de 全国性 quán guó xìng 立法 lì fǎ
The "laws" being referenced were primarily plans for a trial rather than fully implemented national legislation
The Coalition did shift policy away from mandatory technological reforms toward an industry-dependent voluntary approach.
However, framing this as "repealing laws" when the ACT trial was the primary measure being abandoned (and Labor had already retreated from meaningful reform) presents an incomplete picture.