• Breadcrumb navigation uses Javascript

---

Gambling:

Zealots misdirect rage against the machine

by Simon Longstaff

Last week's report that our collective, annual gambling losses have topped thirteen billion dollars fired up the simmering debate about the place of gaming and wagering in Australian society. Opinion is divided between the extremes of those who condone each and every form of gambling as benign 'entertainment' and those who zealously condemn the same as a social ‘evil’.

In general, gambling is a form of behaviour in which people undertake a risk in the expectation that there is a better than even chance that they will enjoy a result that leaves them in a position at least as good, if not better, than they would otherwise have been in. People take risks of this kind; that is, they gamble, every day. When someone crosses the road against the lights - they gamble. When a person flirts with another, he gambles. Buying shares in a listed company is, of course, a gamble. The fact that the thing risked is life and limb (on the crossing), self-esteem (when flirting) or one's savings (when investing) is not a relevant point of distinction.

Another line of attack against gambling is to point out the devastating consequences for those who become addicted to its practices. Likewise, people often condemn gambling for its sometime association with organised crime. The trouble with these arguments is that they confuse the central practice of gambling with a number of genuine 'evils' that are, in fact, external to it.

Addiction to gambling is a terrible scourge that does untold harm to many Australians. However, the relevant ‘evil’ is not gambling, but addiction. Addiction to anything is bad - whether it be to work, to television or to chocolate. While we know that there are physiological reasons why virtually anyone will become addicted to substances like heroin, the same is not true of gambling.

Organised crime is an evil wherever it occurs. However, its operatives prey on many types of activity that we find ethically acceptable. Nobody argues that eating in restaurants should be banned simply because some establishments pay so-called 'protection money' to organised crime gangs.

So, on examination, it seems to me that if the thing put at risk is entirely yours to control, then there is nothing wrong with having a punt. People who risk their family's future by betting the housekeeping money are out of order - not because they gamble, but because they take liberties with things of value that they are obliged to provide for the sake of others.

To argue that the practice of gambling is, of itself, pretty innocent is not to say that it should be allowed to proliferate throughout society. First, if left to their own devices, any unscrupulous operators will seek to exploit those liable to become gambling addicts. All too often, the design of the gambling environment (and experience) is consciously crafted so as to 'hook' the punter.

I suppose the same can be said of many places - ranging from art galleries to cathedrals. However, galleries and cathedrals are rarely, if ever, as 'soulless' as the average gaming room in a casino. Even worse are the poker machine pits, in pubs and clubs, where row upon row of people sit like so many chooks - conditioned to peck the coloured buttons in the hope that a few coins will be dispensed as a reward before their beak breaks off. These are not places designed to lift the human spirit. These are not places in which we are likely to flourish.

Second, while gambling may be a fairly benign practice, this doesn't mean that there is any justification for it invading every aspect of our lives. Singing is a harmless activity that can be hugely entertaining - even uplifting. However, I wouldn't want to have to dodge a choir on every corner. There can be too much of even a good thing. Poker machines, games of chance and all the rest have invaded most public spaces - pubs, clubs, the list goes on. The way things are going it's probably only a matter of time until we go to the local laundromat and find the ubiquitous pokies squatting in eager anticipation of gobbling up the nation's savings.

Finally and most importantly, there is something unsettling to our democracy whenever governments become overly dependent on revenue generated by a particular sector of the community. The world of gambling is, for all intents and purposes, controlled by a small subset of society. As gambling revenues grow, there is a real risk that the principle of prudent governance, for the sake of all, will be distorted by the fiscal clout of the gaming industry.

It may come to pass that governments reverse the trend and restrict gambling to a few established precincts that provide an appropriate social context for gaming. This might see a return to gambling at the track, a few well-regulated casinos and perhaps, the network of TABs. Everywhere else might then become a 'gambling free zone'. In the end, society may demand nothing less.

There is no good reason to return to the bad old days when gambling was illegal. There is nothing wrong with gambling as such. After all, life is a gamble. But, for all that, we'd be mad to think that gambling is all there is to life.

discuss this article

---