For many years, poker fans, players, and advocates have made the case for the Australian government to legalize online poker. But since the major online poker operators – PokerStars, partypoker et al – left the Australian market in 2017, lawmakers have been unwilling to even consider it. While many people have given up on the government seeing the light, some continue to speak up. The former head of the NSW gaming regulator recently made some good arguments.
By Rose Varrelli · Published · Last updated
- Offshore operators, Australian rules explained
- Payout speed by payment method
- POLi, Neosurf, cards and crypto
Newson Argues for Online Poker
Paul Newson recently wrote an article for Inside Asian Gaming. He pointed out the erroneous thinking behind the current Australian gambling policy, specifically with regard to online poker. And he pointed out the many ways that online poker is different than games of chance, different from games that lawmakers most want to regulate.
But who is Paul Newson?
His article bio states that he is a principal at Senet Legal and former head of the NSW gaming regulator.
Before Newson joined Senet, he spent one year as the President of the International Association of Gaming Regulators.
Most significantly, he served as a trustee for the NSW Responsible Gambling Fund for 6.5 years. Further, he served as the Deputy Secretary of Liquor, Gaming & Racing in the NSW Department of Industry from 2017 to 2019.
Outdated Aussie Laws
Newson started his article by noting that the online prohibition in Australia is an example of the “sometimes slipshod and outdated gambling policy settings.” He asserted that the current gambling regulatory arrangements in some Australian states is an example of a government not following the data.
The outdated laws are one of the many factors identified by the Crown Resorts scandal. Not only were the laws and regulatory framework unprepared to properly regulate the casino industry, the NSW regulator’s response to the scandal was underwhelming.
Another problem with outdated gambling laws is that they promote prohibition instead of effective regulation. Prohibition often ignores the problem. The government assumes that a law against it will discourage the action in question. In fact, prohibition usually pushes the activity underground.
While prohibition may be in order for the most offensive behaviors and crimes, it should not apply to things like online poker.
Game of Skill
Many have long argued that poker is a game of skill. There are skill components to the game that differentiate it from other gambling games like slot machines. It is also important to note that poker players compete against each other and not the house. The house collects its fees – rake – no matter the outcome of the games or the hands.
Newson did not come down on one side or the other in this debate of poker as a game of skill or chance. However, he noted that the skill component of poker is “increasingly relevant and performance predictive” in the long run. The basic acknowledgement that there is skill involved in poker at some level is important.
And it is important enough that online poker should be separated from other gambling, other casino-type games, when it comes to laws and regulations.
Moreover, lawmakers must understand the different between poker and poker machines or pokies. The misunderstanding greatly hurts the views of online poker in government.
Lesser Gambling Harm Risk
With the skill component in mind, one could assert that online poker is less a risk of gambling harm than other forms of gambling.
Newson pointed to a 2010 Productivity Commission Gambling Inquiry Report that separated poker card games. The report determined that poker should be classified differently with regard to gambling harm because it is a relatively “safe” form of gambling online. The report indicates that the skill component is not alone in separating poker from other gambling games, as the level of social interaction in poker is also unique.
In addition, an analysis of gambling data from the UK Gambling Commission shows no increase in rates of gambling harm when researchers included online poker in gambling studies.
Regulation is Key
The main point of the article is to advocate for regulation. He wrote:
“A regulated industry would provide entertainment and recreation for interested players, as well as service the cohort of professional online poker players. Consumer protections and responsible gambling provisions – either unavailable or possibly unreliable under current arrangements – would be key features of a domestic regulated industry.”
Regulation of an online poker industry would require operators to pay taxes to operate in the Australian market. It would also work to entice players to take their business from offshore sites to ones regulated by Australia.
Online Poker Advocacy
Poker players, fans, and advocates tried for years to lobby the Australian government for legalized online poker. The Australian Online Poker Alliance tried to work for positive legislation. However, they relied a great deal on poker player and public relations expert Joseph Del Luca. He had good information and connections, but he kept falling out of touch with the community.
A long-running thread on the Two Plus Two forum on the topic shows a growing frustration with Del Luca over the past several years. In the past year, players have grown increasingly impatient. Mostly, they have given up, as no one will advocate for them.