Contact Us

Section navigation

Online Gaming - Australian Productivity Commission Final Report on Gambling (June 2010) - What does it mean for the online gaming sector?

By Jamie Nettleton, Partner and Andrew Dawson, Special Counsel
23 June 2010

Introduction

Earlier today (23 June 2010), the Australian Productivity Commission (Commission) released its Final Report on Gambling[1]. The Report represents a significant milestone in Australian gambling regulation and follows on from the Draft Report the Commission published in October 2009.[2]

The Productivity Commission was requested by the Australian Government to report on various matters relating to the gambling industry including:

This review represents the second inquiry conducted by the Commission, the first being in 1999. The 2010 report makes a number of recommendations concerning Australia's gambling industries, including several specific to online gaming.

Key Findings and Recommendations

The Commission's Findings

The IGA prohibits the provision of online gaming (but not online wagering on races or sports betting) to Australian residents. 

The Commission examined whether the IGA had achieved its objectives which included:

The Productivity Commission reached the view that, although it is probable that the IGA has had the desired effect of reducing demand for online gaming and, therefore, the development of the online gaming industry, it is not clear that the effect has been large.  In fact, consumption by Australians of online gaming services offered by international sites has grown considerably and will continue to grow. The IGA has, therefore, had limited effectiveness and that effectiveness will decline over time.

This means that Australians participating in online gaming do so using offshore online gaming sites which may not have appropriate harm minimisation processes in place and may operate with unscrupulous business practices. In other words, there is no means for an Australian wishing to engage in online gaming activity to participate through a service licensed by an Australian jurisdiction having regard to Australian harm minimisation principles.

Although the Commission's conclusions (as discussed in more detail below) apply predominantly to online gaming, they are equally relevant to gaming that can be conducted using other technologies under Commonwealth government control such as mobile phones and broadcasting.

The Commission's Conclusions

Online gaming offers unique benefits and also carries with it risks.  Although the risks have often been overstated, the relatively high proportion of problem gamblers that surveys and data suggest use online gaming services is a cause for concern.  These and other potential harms associated with online gaming indicate that appropriate regulation of online gaming is needed to protect consumers.

However, in respect to the current prohibitions in the IGA:

Accordingly, the IGA in its current form does not represent the best regulatory option for Australia.  The two broad regulatory options available are:

Although it is questionable whether strengthening the IGA through the imposition of effective internet filter/blocking mechanisms is possible (which are discussed), the costs of strengthening the IGA and continuing the prohibition of online gaming are not warranted by the apparent level of harm of online gaming. 

Accordingly, the amendment of the IGA to permit gradual managed liberalisation of online gaming is preferable.  This gradual liberalisation should commence with online poker because it appears to be the least risky and, therefore, safest form of online gambling.

Any regulation in Australia of online gaming should be national. If possible, it should be consistent with regulation in similarly liberalised countries (such as the UK) - this will enable Australian licensed operators to compete internationally.

The Commission's Recommendations

The Australian Government should amend the IGA to permit the supply of online poker games.

Online poker, along with other gambling forms currently exempted from the IGA, should be subject to a regulatory regime that mandates:

The Australian Government should monitor the effectiveness of:

The Australian Government should also evaluate whether:

Differences from the Draft Report

The key difference in the Final Report from the Draft Report relates to the suggestion of gradual liberalisation of online gaming with the licensing of online poker occurring first.

The Australian Government's Response

The Australian Government issued a press release after the release of the Final Report stating:

Way forward

The Final Report of the Commission indicates that the prohibitionist approach in the IGA has not been effective and that a more appropriate way of regulating online gaming is through a policy of managed liberalisation. Clearly, the Government does not accept this approach - however, we anticipate that considerable debate will continue on this topic, and the appropriate means in which online gaining should be regulated in Australia.

 


[1] See http://www.pc.gov.au/projects/inquiry/gambling-2009

[2] See http://www.pc.gov.au/projects/inquiry/gambling-2009/draft and Addisons FocusPaper entitled "Productivity Commission Draft Report on Gambling (October 2009)  - What does this mean for the online gaming sector?".

For further information please contact: