18 August 2026

Mr GAFFNEY (Mersey) - I rise and choose to speak in full support of the honourable member for Nelson's motion. In December last year, the Council spoke with absolute clarity in agreeing that gambling advertising and sponsorship has no place in publicly owned or publicly funded venues. I will begin by thanking the honourable member for Nelson for putting forward the motion and indeed going to the effort of providing members a background information document - that was very helpful.

The first resolution was one that recognised and appreciated what communities, researchers and service providers have been saying for years. Gambling harm is not an abstract policy concern but a real and growing public health issue affecting families across Tasmania and one that is intensified by the current cost-of-living crisis. The matter of gambling and gaming in Tasmania, and indeed Australia more broadly, is quite unique. It is unique in the sense that members from all sides of politics agree that it is an insidious, incessant issue. Indeed, gambling is well recognised by society as a critical issue that requires serious reform and ongoing efforts by legislators to protect constituents from the harm that it does. As such, I would like to thank the honourable member for Nelson for championing this issue in this place. It is an admirable and important thing.

For all the agreement on the harm that gambling does to Tasmania, it is a matter that stays conspicuously in the fringe of regulation. Indeed, at the same time we reform gaming legislation to end a monopolistic company, we provide them incredible tax breaks. At the same time we see the government just recently looking to reforming our gaming legislation, we see it walking backwards in its commitments to cashless gaming regulation, providing seemingly endless investment in a venue that would inevitably, almost symbiotically enable gambling at a level not yet seen in Tasmania. Throughout these outcomes, all sides of politics have continued to cry for further regulation in the space.

As such, when the Legislative Council makes a timely resolution to call upon the government to take a very small action in the space to act as a leader in protecting young Tasmanians and others from the insidious roots of gambling, it is just another long string of disappointing outcomes. Pro-stadium voters, government officials and indeed members have at times labelled the stadium build as having the potential to be an innovative one-of-one technological marvel right here in Hobart. One must question why, if this is the opportunity to lead Australia, we do not take steps to lead Australia in the space of gambling. A ban on gambling in those venues that are likely propped up by government money would not be out of place. It would be a governmental decision abiding in a code of morality.

In a national context, these perspectives are becoming ever more critical. The federal government's gambling advertising reforms announced on 2 April 2026 demonstrate a national momentum that is shifting decisively towards stronger protections. Those reforms partially implement the recommendations of the 2023 House of Representatives Standing Committee report, You Win Some, You Lose More. It is a report that documented in detail the scale of harm caused by pervasive promotion of gambling through the medium advertising. Crucially, the federal reform allows Tasmania to immediately prohibit gambling advertising at state-owned or state-funded venues and, if anything, the recommendations reinforce the legitimacy and necessity of state-level action.

We've also seen the recent national social media ban for those under the age of 16, a move that can play its part in reducing the exposure to harmful gambling advertising and its potential link to problem gambling. There's simply no excuse, governments can act. It's simply a willingness to do something other than to kick the can down the road. Yet, what we see is hand-wringing from a government that promises genuine gambling reform and then apparently kowtows to the preferences and stipulations of the gambling industry. I must ask who or what is in control as from here it looks as though the gambling industry only has to hint at its displeasure for the government to immediately toe the line.

We are not talking about the industry-owned venues, we are talking about publicly owned venues that carry a responsibility to uphold community sensibilities and wellbeing. Allowing gambling advertising in these spaces and on the uniforms of players representing those venues only normalises and publicises an activity known to cause actual harm. It sends the wrong message to young people, families and those already struggling with gambling addiction. We recognised this in 2025 and we should reaffirm that position today.

Of course, such a suggestion requires the government to play hardball with those in industries that have deep ties with gambling, which it has repeatedly demonstrated it is unwilling to do. One must question, after we have acceded to every demand for the stadium, the point at which the government will decide that it can determine Tasmania's destiny without simply capitulating to the demands of interest groups. Will it be after the last brick is laid or once the first game is played? Or will it be years from now when we finally take back control of our state?

With that said, I'd like to stress, as I did when we spoke to the original motion, that:

… this is not an attack on sport or on businesses that rely on sponsorship; it is a decision about the role of government and the messages we are sending from public spaces. We can protect vulnerable Tasmanians. We can reduce the grooming of children into gambling and align our state with national recommendations - while supporting teams and events to find ethical, community-minded partners.

As the honourable member for Nelson noted, the bicameral nature of our parliament entails equal, symmetrical power. Subsequently, it demands equal, symmetrical respect. This place is one side of the coin and it is disappointing when serious, important resolutions such as this one are swept under the rug. It is a matter of good practice. When the Legislative Council calls on the government to act, and particularly on matters of public health and public accountability, it is entirely reasonable to expect a timely and fully transparent response. The government is here for all Tasmanians - not just those it agrees with and those of the most powerful voices that can bend its ear.

More than six months have passed, and we are still waiting on the government's implementation update, with not even a brief apology or attempt to say we are still working on it and it's on the way. That is an absolute failure of the decorum of this place and is almost contempt. When the Legislative Council respectfully asks for an implementation report, it does so to understand the progress and clarity on an agreed resolution. It is also a perfect opportunity for the government to demonstrate an initiative-taking public policy approach in countering the harm that comes from gambling. This process also has the benefit of reducing public exposure and endorsement of gambling by the tacit support of the state and the sport. These expectations have still to be met. The government can and must do better.

I'm not even suggesting the government needs to enact the resolution's recommendations entirely, even if that is the most desirable outcome; there are aspects that would be significantly easier to implement, which would do much by way of demonstrating actual, tangible commitment by the government.

While I appreciate industry and business concerns in this space regarding impact and pragmatism, the reality is there are plenty of actions the government can take that will not

undermine the viability of sports. For instance, I imagine it would be quite easy to ban advertisements on screens in these buildings.

A considered cohesive response to the resolution by the government, rather than simply a speech by the Leader prior to voting against the motion, would have been appropriate in this space and it would have been a good opportunity to see some genuine commitment or skin in the game by this government.

I understand the government has committed to overhauling legislation in the gaming and gambling space, and I appreciate that. Nonetheless, it is the fact that Tasmanians want, and indeed deserve, stronger action in this space. The contents of this motion represent a part of that picture and it's really disappointing to have heard nothing from the government. As was clearly explained when the original resolution passed in 2025, it is a matter of protecting our children. That is not hyperbole. It is well accepted that the gambling industry is preying on and grooming teenagers from a young age. Frankly, if the government does not take appropriate steps, it risks complicity in the creation of a growing demographic of young gambling addicts. This will hurt real Tasmanians - real lives and real families - and it's something that needs to be taken utterly seriously.

The motion does not ask for anything unreasonable, it simply requests that in a month's time the government provide the update it was already expected to deliver and it give a fulsome response to the December 2025 resolution. Tasmanians deserve transparency, and our public venues and team uniforms deserve to be free of frivolous, invidious gambling ads. Gambling is a scourge that undermines so much of the health and wellbeing of some of our most vulnerable in our community. We can and must do better. I fully support the motion.