Posts Tagged ‘gambling corruption’

The UK gambling industry is worth billions, with 5% of customers responsible for 70% of that revenue. That includes me – after my addiction spiralled in the pandemic

It’s the middle of a third set tiebreak on Wimbledon’s Centre Court, and 15,000 tennis fans are clapping to their own beat, whipping up anticipation for a crucial line call. Hawk-Eye, the automated line system the tournament uses, the tennis equivalent of a Roman emperor’s thumb – able to overrule the traditional lines people with their ostentatious crouching – flashes on to the big screen. The clapping reaches a climax: Jannik Sinner, a wiry, 21-year-old Italian with a somewhat incongruous blaze of red, curly hair has hit a backhand long by a few centimetres of the All England Club grass. A few minutes later, he loses the tiebreak – and I lose £800.

In the preceding two years, I have lost much, much more betting on tennis. I have lost £40,000. I didn’t see it coming, the gambling addiction. Even now, I wince a bit at the word “addiction”, though that is plainly what it is.

“I really wish there had been a warning that gambling was addictive,” I joked to a friend, though neither of us was laughing – at that point I was genuinely worried about paying rent and bills. I had lost all of my savings. I’d “spent” an entire book advance.

Along with many people, I still imagined gambling as the preserve of bored middle-aged men in rundown high-street shops; Ladbrokes and William Hills nestled among kebab joints and pawn shops. Stubby pencils, receipts littering floors, rising voices as dogs with prominent ribs raced around a track on a TV screen. Often, that’s not the way it is any more. Nowadays you can bankrupt yourself via an app on a mobile phone, or a never-closed browser tab.

How did it start? I ask myself that a lot. Usually when I’m looking at my bank balance – which I now try not to, like the squeamish studiously ignoring the nurse drawing blood. Until a couple of years ago, I had never so much as put 50p on the Grand National. I’d never bought a lottery ticket; entered a raffle; set foot in a casino. I didn’t understand odds. Gambling held zero appeal.

Then, a few things happened. The first was the pandemic. It is probably not surprising that more than a third of problem gamblers relapsed during the pandemic. Housebound, there was nothing to do. Those who were lucky enough to keep their jobs had more disposable income, and a lack of commuting meant increased free time. Those who did not keep their jobs turned to a possible avenue to raise cash quickly.

But perhaps there were two key triggers for me. First, even before the pandemic, I had been depressed for a seemingly endless, anhedonic time (I have diagnoses of bipolar disorder and ADHD).

The depression meant that I had retreated from personal interaction and spent the majority of my days alone, usually in bed. Finding it difficult to do the things I usually would. Hard to focus. Mostly unable to work, read. I had no motivation, and was frequently suicidal. Online withdrawal accompanied real life withdrawal. I stopped using Twitter, when previously I had been an avid user.

If bookmakers were to conceive the perfect sport, it would be tennis. At almost any moment, there is a match somewhere

It turns out tech companies do not like it when one takes an extended break, because when I started to feel a little progress with my mental health and returned, the algorithm had buried me, which was the second trigger. I was no longer getting the hits of dopamine I was used to from engagement, talking to friends and colleagues and feeling in touch with the world.

The reward system in my brain wasn’t firing. Some smokers quit and take up knitting to keep their hands busy – I replaced scrolling Twitter notifications for checking live match scores. I replaced actual triumphs in life, big or small – being nominated for awards, or writing a piece I was proud of, or just enjoying drinks with friends on a beautiful evening – with the hit of winning.

My entire existence revolved around it.


If bookmakers were to conceive the perfect sport, it would be tennis. At almost any given moment, there is a tennis match happening. Most players take a single month off at Christmas, and that’s it. Come January, it’s the beginning of the hard-court season, and things never let up from there. There are multiple tours for men and women. For men, the highest-level tour is the main ATP tour, followed by Challenger and ITF Futures tournaments. Women compete on the WTA tour, and below that, the 125 and 125K series and ITF (International Tennis Federation) events. But in the end I was even betting on completely obscure college players.

There are never-ending markets. You can bet outright on who will win matches, or whole tournaments. But you can also bet on whether Player A will win their first service game. You can bet on what the score of that first service game will be. You can even bet, during the game, on who will win the next point. Have I bet on who will win the next point? Of course I have. You will never win £500 quicker; you will never lose £500 quicker.

I went from being someone who enjoyed and played tennis in school, but who, as an adult, barely followed the sport, to becoming obsessed. I watched every single tournament. I knew that certain tournaments use different balls for men and women. I knew which female players – mostly the flatter hitters – hate this. I knew that John Isner, who stands at almost 7ft tall, and has hit 13,947 aces in his career, will nearly always end up playing a tiebreak, because his serve is so hard to break. (Yes, you can bet on whether a match will include a tiebreak.)

I knew the personalities and characteristics of the umpires, the ones most likely to piss off the mercurial Aussie Nick Kyrgios (most of them, but especially Carlos Bernardes). That the gangly Greek, Stefanos Tsitsipas, who resembles a daddy long legs when squatting low and wide in preparation to receive a serve, has a propensity to take bathroom breaks. I learned which players are most likely to choke on the big points, and which are, conversely, particularly “clutch”.

The unique aspect of betting on sports is that you are handing agency over your finances to strangers. To weather, even. It is an extraordinarily stupid thing to do.

I was, perhaps, relying on a teenager making his tour debut, who may have been carrying an injury I didn’t know about, to not be destitute at the end of the month. Was I going all in on a talented female player who, unbeknown to me, would not be at her best because she argued with her boyfriend the night before and came on her period that morning?

Rafa Nadal, 14-time Roland Garros champion, prefers to play in the daytime on clay. The court is quicker; the ball bounces higher; the humidity is lower. But what if it rained, and his match was rescheduled to the evening session?

I’d wager (obviously) that much of the abuse sports stars suffer online is because, someone, somewhere, has bet on them doing something they haven’t ended up doing. The mind of an addict becomes unreasonable, irrational.

Because all gamblers have a feeling. They will win all of their money back this time. At first you have to win £1,000 back. Then you have to win back £5,000. And on and on it goes, like a 20-stroke rally which ends each time with the ball slamming into the net.

Anyone can fall into problem gambling, but people with existing mental health issues are particularly susceptible

But then, you do win some of it back! You win thousands, and you think: great, I will use these winnings as a platform to win the rest back. Then Iga Swiatek, world No 1, who has won a record breaking 37 matches in a row, will inexplicably lose. Or, frequently, every leg, bar one of your accumulator – a bet requiring multiple results to come in – will win. Gamblers live in a permanent state of if only and what if. What if I hadn’t cashed out then; what if I had? What if I’d trusted my gut instinct on that one? What if I hadn’t?

I tried to quit many times. I would utilise “self-excluding” options. I used, and eventually blocked myself from, 16 different online bookies. When I blocked myself from the bigger sites, I would then use even dodgier outfits: less attractive odds, glitchy websites, opaque terms and conditions.

At one point, in true addict style, I roped family into it. I ended up lying to my mother and sister to borrow their bank cards to set up new accounts. (I transferred money to them, so I was still gambling with my own money and not theirs, which was at least something.) I had multiple identities on multiple websites. I was three different people.

Unfortunately, all of them were losing.


According to the UK Health Security Agency 2.2 million people in England either have a form of gambling addiction, or are at risk of one. In 2021, there were more than 400 gambling-related suicides in the UK (where gambling addiction was noted as a contributing factor at inquest). The charity Gambling With Lives, established by the parents of Jack Ritchie, who was 24 when he died, documents just some of them on its website.

Twenty-three-year-old Joshua Jones, a talented musician who played in the Wiltshire Youth Jazz Orchestra, gambled his first term university grant and sold his possessions as things spiralled, and he ended up sleeping on a friend’s sofa. Paul Wills, 48, a popular police sergeant, whose wife, Hana, had no idea that her husband had been sucked into gambling.

Kimberly Wadsworth, 32, worked in marketing. She had told her family about what was happening – they even helped her book a hypnotherapy session – but she took her own life in 2018. Gambling companies had made her a “VIP” customer; a status that confers special offers and promotions for people spending (i.e. losing) a lot of money, and sometimes gives partial rebates on losses to encourage them to keep going.

I remember one friend, when my losses were at £15k, said: “Well, the good thing is, it could be worse.” At the time I thought: How could this possibly be worse? Then I lost another 25 grand, spent another six months in total despair, so she was right. But I haven’t become homeless, or had a marriage fall apart. I’m still alive.

It will probably not come as a surprise that, though anyone can fall into problem gambling, people with existing mental health issues are particularly susceptible.

The future of the gambling industry is, depending on which side of the net margins you fall, bleak or booming

When it comes to my own diagnoses, multiple studies have established links between them and gambling. According to a Cambridge University study, one in 10 people with bipolar disorder develop “moderate to severe problems” with gambling. Interestingly, while in the general population men make up the majority of problem gamblers, in bipolar patients there is no gender differential.

One study of people addicted to gambling who had sought treatment at a clinic in Melbourne reported that almost 30% screened positively for ADHD (compared with a 14% rate in a community sample), and there was a positive correlation between the severity of an individual’s ADHD and the severity of their addiction. This rather throws into relief a recent tendency for people to self-diagnosis ADHD on the basis that they, say, once lost their keys.

Incidence of problem gambling is also higher for those with other mental illnesses and addictions. Vulnerable and underprivileged people are lucrative customers across the board – and targeted. Those with the largest losses, both online and in-person, are concentrated in the most deprived areas. The east London borough of Newham, one of the poorest areas in the country, has more than 80 betting shops. At one point, there were 18 in a single street.

This is a practice known as “clustering” – a way of getting around a rule that limits each shop to four fixed-odds betting terminals (FOBTs), modern touch screen slot-machines, which, alongside the flashing lights, musical jingles and tumbling coins of traditional arcade units, offer rapid financial ruin.

Clustering as an unethical workaround is not out of character for bookmakers. If the house always wins, that’s partly because the house is haunted. When customers are on winning streaks, bookmakers will engage in “gubbing”, a term for restricting the activity of bettors. This happened to me many times. If I was consistently winning, I would have my bets restricted, or be limited to pennies per stake. But if I was losing hundreds – even thousands – of pounds in days, I could bet however much I liked. Bookies are never not moving the goalposts.


With sports betting, there’s that other hazard: fixing. Tennis is ripe for fixing. The million-dollar endorsement deals of top athletes belie just how poorly paid lower ranked players are. Most struggle to break even. A first-round win in a Futures tournament will earn a player around $150. Factor in travel, accommodation, and equipment costs – and a salary paid to a coach – and professional tennis is far from a remunerative career.

About a year into my gambling hell, I discovered that a player who I frequently bet on, Nicolas Kicker, had been suspended from professional tennis for throwing matches and only recently rejoined the tour. At the time of his offences, Kicker was in significant debt, worrying about how to support his young son. He bought second-hand rackets, which he strung himself.

So when Kicker was approached and offered $15,000 to lose a match in three sets, he took it. The problem was that Kicker’s under par performance was so obvious that it blew up on social media. In footage of the match available on YouTube, Kicker hits feeble serves and swipes aimless returns like a cat failing to catch a fly. He is almost visibly annoyed whenever he wins a point. Almost £700,000 had been traded on the match on Betfair alone. It was just hours before an investigation was opened.

After years of criticism for little action on corruption in the game, a toothless body named the Tennis Investigation Unit was replaced with the independent International Tennis Integrity Agency headed, among others, Dee Bain, the former veteran Metropolitan detective who had ensnared Kicker. Barely a month now passes without fines and suspensions meted out, underscoring just how insidious the practice is.

Tournament organisers are also becoming wise to “courtsiders”, members of crime rings who sit in stadiums and relay real-time information to bettors, via encrypted apps such as Telegram, in attempts to beat online and television score updates. They have even been known to evade security with fake beards and wigs. The integrity agency has a big task on its hands. Not only does the ITF sell its own in-play data to bookies, but fixing is fully fledged organised crime. Mafia-linked rings, spread across Europe and Asia, move around millions of pounds. What if that player I bet on isn’t underperforming because she came on her period after all, but because she’s been paid off by a Russian syndicate?


I was contacted, eventually, by the “safer gambling teams” of some betting outlets – not all. I lied to them about my income and savings, and how much I could afford to lose. One time I said I had inherited a windfall. Another time I said I earned £30k more than I do. They didn’t check, but if they had, I’m not sure I wouldn’t have been furious rather than grateful.

Because the problem with sicknesses of the mind is their immanent ruthlessness. The person with deep-rooted trauma in desperate need of effective therapy might defensively try to undermine their therapist. The patient with life-destroying insomnia will sleep through their appointments at the sleep clinic. Addicts will lie, and lie, and lie again.

Nevertheless, these companies should have checked. A gambler’s word is not worth the betting slip it’s written on. Bookmakers cannot be allowed to continue operating in profitable disingenuousness, encouraging people with clear problems to carry on; to lose everything and then, finally, their lives.

I’ve written here mostly in the past tense. But the truth is I decided to write this piece because I am still gambling, and I considered that this might be the one thing that could stop me. Because, though I currently have the very real and justified worries that I will lose my job, friends and home, I also have, as I type this, one eye on my phone checking for results.

At the time of writing, the US Open, the most unpredictable of the slams, is about to begin. The sweltering, late-summer sun will see sweat dripping from the peaks of players’ caps, ball boys and girls running with towels to mop it from the court. I tell myself that after this tournament I must stop. That I will retire along with Serena Williams, whether or not I win everything back (I have a feeling). In the meantime: there’s a ball to be struck, a line call to be made, a fist to be pumped – and I hold my breath.

by Hannah Jane Parkinson

Sun 20 Nov 2022 19.00 AEDT

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2022/nov/20/gambling-addiction-tennis-bet365-online-betting-hannah-jane-parkinson

“Big industries like fossil fuels and gambling are distorting democratic processes to win political outcomes that put their profits ahead of our wellbeing.” 

Australia is falling behind other democratic countries when it comes to regulating corporate influence over our federal politicians, says a new report. 

Selling out: How powerful industries corrupt our democracy was released by the Human Rights Law Centre last week, and details how the fossil fuels, tobacco and gambling industries continue to use their wealth to manipulate Australia’s democratic processes. 

The report found that what is considered illegal and corrupt conduct overseas, seems to be classed as business as usual in Canberra. 

It highlights how the fossil fuels, tobacco and gambling industries are capitalising on the government’s weak integrity laws, and how these corporate players influence politicians – whether that’s by contributing financially to a political party or lobbying and running public attack campaigns during elections.  

In the report, Human Rights Law Centre senior lawyer Alice Drury stated that in a healthy democracy the best interests of people, communities and the planet are at the heart of every single decision our government makes.

“But right now, big industries like fossil fuels and gambling are distorting democratic processes to win political outcomes that put their profits ahead of our wellbeing,” Drury said.

“Australians support reforms to make our communities less addicted and our environment healthier, but the fossil fuels, tobacco and gambling industries are building political power to block sensible regulation.” 

Reform around political donations and integrity

The report called for more transparency of political donations and a ban on those over $6,000, public disclosure of ministerial diaries and an end to the rotating door between political life and corporate lobbying. 

Australian Council on Smoking and Health (ACSH) chief executive Maurice Swanson wholeheartedly agreed. She said ACSH would like to specifically see the prohibition of political donations from the tobacco industry. 

“These donations corrupt the political process and undermine and delay the passage of legislation that would significantly reduce smoking in Australia,” Swanson said. 

Dr Kate da Costa, head of campaigns for the Alliance for Gambling Reform, said that any political initiatives should always prioritise individual and community health above profit taking for a few.

“This report shows how that is simply not happening in Australia – the gambling industry can protect casinos which break the law, have ministers removed from portfolios and slow down reforms designed to keep organised crime out of community spaces,” da Costa said. 

“We know the community supports reforms to poker machines and sports gambling advertising – this report clearly spells out why those reforms are not happening.” 

Australian Conservation Foundation democracy campaigner Jolene Elberth said that the coal and gas industry wasn’t too different from tobacco and gambling, and backed the report’s call for integrity reform. 

“Each year, coal and gas companies spend millions lobbying our politicians and buying access to decision makers through political donations in order to influence government policy in the direction of their own corporate interests, rather than what is in the best interest of people and the planet,” she said. 

“It’s why the Australian government chose a ‘gas-fired recovery’ rather than investing in renewables and why we have an inadequate national climate policy.

“We need common sense integrity reforms so that our politicians listen to the communities they are elected to represent, rather than the corporations that fund their campaigns.” 

Nikki Stefanoff | 31 January 2022

The $550-a-head dinner came with a glittering view of Sydney’s Iron Cove Bay. The multi-million-dollar venue glowed Liberal Party blue.

The guest of honour was Tony Abbott, at the time the prime-minister-in-waiting. 

“Choose real change,” the posters urged. “A stronger Australia. A better future.”

Among the 600 tickets sold for the 2013 Liberal Party fundraiser at Le Montage in Sydney’s inner west was a “gold package” table of five purchased by the RSL & Services Clubs Association.

The association represents the interests of dozens of RSL clubs around Australia and is a member of ClubsNSW.

The $2,750 paid to the Liberal Party’s federal campaign account is one of thousands of payments that have flowed from gambling-related organisations into Australia’s political system over the past 22 years. 

Each of these boxes represents a payment to a political party or group from a person or organisation with an interest in gambling.

Prime ministers and premiers are among the key drawcards for many of these events.

Tony Abbott is mentioned more than a dozen times in connection with payments ranging from as little as $110 for a ClubsNSW contribution described as “Business lunch with the Prime Minister” to a much pricier $105,000 “Tony Abbott dinner” with the Australian Hotels Association.

Other notable mentions include Prime Minister Scott Morrison …

Former prime ministers Kevin Rudd …

… and Malcolm Turnbull …

… and former NSW premier Barry O’Farrell, whose payments include $145,000 from the Australian Hotels Association described simply as “Dinner with Barry O’Farrell”. 

More than 150 ministers, candidates and other politicians are named in connection with payments worth more than $1.5 million.

A further $3.5 million in payments describe breakfasts, lunches and dinners, fundraisers, sponsorships and other events with MPs, party powerbrokers and campaign managers. 

However, donors are not required to disclose the motivation behind a payment.

As a result, more than 85 per cent of the $40 million disclosed by gambling-related organisations was submitted with no description or further detail.

And it gets worse. The money declared by donors is only the tip of the iceberg.

Loopholes in Australia’s disclosure system mean numerous payments are disclosed only by the recipient but not by the donor, or vice versa.

(And in other cases, payments are not disclosed at all.)

So, for every dollar that gambling-related donors have disclosed to the federal electoral commission since 1998-99, recipients disclosed $1.58. 

This means at least $81,769,853 in political payments disclosed over 22 years is linked to entities with a stake in gambling. 

These figures come from an ABC News investigation tracking gambling-related political payments between 1998-99 and 2020-21.

The investigation uses data from the Australian Electoral Commission (AEC) Transparency Register, a public database of annual disclosures about the financial dealings of political parties, candidates and others involved in the federal electoral process.

Political donations are murky territory. The ABC’s estimate of $81.77 million in gambling-related contributions is at least double the amounts identified by previous analyses, and yet almost certainly an underestimate. The true figure is impossible to calculate because loopholes in the laws governing Australia’s political donations mean more than a third of the money poured into the political system is “dark money”, whose source remains unknown. 

It is also unclear how much of the money relates to politically motivated payments and how much relates to other transactions such as operating costs. This is because the definition of a “donation” under federal disclosure laws is similar to a “gift”: it only captures payments for which something of equal value is not returned. 

This means income received from fundraising events, for example, or other instances where parties can say the donor also received something, may be categorised not as donations but “other receipts” or sometimes “unspecified” payments, even though they generate income for a political group.

For transparency, the ABC has included all disclosed payments, even though they may not be strictly considered donations.

The tale of how politics and gambling became so deeply entwined in Australia is inseparable from the factors that have driven Australians to become the world’s biggest losers, squandering more on gambling per capita than any other nation.

Australia is arguably the world’s most prolific gambling market, says Monash University associate professor and gambling researcher Charles Livingstone. “It’s certainly the only place in the world where, across the country — with the exception of WA — you’ve got high-impact gaming machines in pubs and clubs.”

A 2017 Australia Institute report found Australia had 0.3 per cent of the world’s population but 76 per cent of the world’s poker machines outside of gambling-only venues.

“And we’re not talking about three machines in the corner of the pub or four machines in the High Street bookie shop, as in Britain. You’re looking at hundreds of machines in some suburban clubs, and multiple suburban clubs in multiple areas,” Livingstone says.

The result is an industry that generates massive amounts of money. In 2018-19 Australians lost $25 billion gambling. Just over half went to the pokies. That same year, the government earned $6.56 billion in gambling tax revenue.

More than 80 per cent of the money from gambling interests came from the top 20 donors

Australian Hotels AssociationCanberra Labor ClubClubsNSW/AustraliaUnited VoiceCrown Resorts and associatesTabcorp Holdings1973 FoundationPalmer Coolum ResortWoolworthsThe Star Entertainment GroupGaming Technologies AssociationCanberra Tradesmen’s Union ClubPublishing and Broadcasting LtdStanley Ho and associatesTattersall’s HoldingsAustralian Casino AssociationRandwick Labor ClubThomas Hotels GroupLiquor Hospitality & Misc. Workers UnionSutherland District Trade Union Club0$5m$10m$15m

$14.7M$9.4M$6.6M$5.9M$5.8M$4M$3.8M$2.6M$2.5M$1.8M$1.7M$1.5M$1.2M$1.2M$1.1M$997K$956.7K$893K$888.1K$884.9K

Source: ABC News analysis of AEC Transparency Register data

Where there’s money, there are hungry investors, from casino tycoons, to supermarket giants Woolworths and Coles — previously Australia’s two largest poker machine operators — to property developers or your local pub or footy club.

This leads to a second remarkable trait of Australia’s gambling industry: its reach.

“It’s very widespread — much more so than most other countries,” Livingstone says. “It penetrates into all sorts of sectors and … it’s been normalised. It’s part of everyday life.”

This is why the ABC has expanded on previous analyses by the Democracy For Sale project, Monash University researchers Charles Livingstone and Maggie Johnson, and the Centre for Public Integrity, to include interests beyond casinos and gaming under the umbrella of “gambling”.

Rather than categorising an entity by one main interest or focusing on the largest gambling-related groups, the ABC compiled these databases into a single dataset of roughly 17,800 entities. From here, we identified more than 370 businesses, unions, organisations and individuals with an interest in gambling.

We then forensically examined all federally disclosed payments connected to those entities, including the PDF returns lodged by the most generous donors, which contain details excluded from the Transparency Register’s online database.

The ABC’s analysis spans hotels and pubs, banking, entertainment, sport, supermarket retailers, media and property, as well as gaming machines owned by the Australian Labor Party. 

The resulting dataset reveals an industry whose influence and power belies most estimates of its size.

And this betrays a third key feature of Australia’s gambling industry. While there’s no telling the precise reasons why any individual or organisation makes a political donation, the gambling industry has cause to be especially motivated.

As Livingstone points out, the industry is entirely dependent on government regulation. This means it is profoundly invested in who is making the rules.

“If you’ve got that licence to print money, you’ve got to protect it.”

Beer giant Fosters, now part of Japan’s Asahi Group, contributed $415,150 between 1998-99 and 2004-05. Fosters owned pokies until 2004, when it split its hotel, gaming and liquor operations into two entities, pub operator Australian Leisure and Hospitality and property arm ALE Property Group.

Sports organisations contributed at least $685,700 to political parties. Major donors include motorsports and horseracing interests …

… as well as NRL and AFL clubs, many of which own poker machines.

Property developers contributed more than $815,000. Of this, $600,000 came from Gold Coast-based golf course owner Hungtat Worldwide on behalf of the late Macau gambling tycoon and former Hungtat chairman Stanley Ho.

Hudson Conway, part of the consortium awarded the monopoly licence for Melbourne’s Crown Casino, gave $215,500. It built and managed the casino and was at one point Crown’s largest shareholder. 

Former media and gambling company Publishing and Broadcasting Ltd contributed more than $1.22 million. Controlled by the Packer family, PBL was the predecessor to embattled gambling empire Crown.

Supermarket behemoths Woolworths and Coles together contributed $3.33 million — more than the previous sectors combined.

Woolies and Coles were ranked first and second as Australia’s largest owners of poker machines until their recent exits from the gambling market.

The majority ($2.48 million) came from Woolies.

Woolies’ demerger from its liquor and hotels business Endeavour Group in June this year left Endeavour with a portfolio of 12,364 poker machines and about 290 TABs and KENO outlets, making it the third-largest gaming operator in Australia. 

The Coles Group tipped in $849,000. Before offloading its hotel and pokies business to Spirits Hotels in March 2019, Coles owned 3,069 poker machines through its hotel chains in Queensland and South Australia.

Individuals donated more than $4.79 million, mostly to the Liberal Party. Among the largest donors are philanthropist Roslyn Packer ($1.34m), mother of billionaire casino mogul James Packer, the largest Crown shareholder …

… and former Crown directors John Poynton ($92,600) and Harold Mitchell ($1.35m).

The estate of the late Tattersall’s founder and lottery promoter George Adams ($1.13m) and Stanley Ho ($509,000) and his associate Anthony Chan ($100,000), who lists the same Hong Kong address as Mr Ho, also gave generously.

These overseas donations were made before the ban on foreign political donations came into effect on January 1, 2019.

Until earlier this year, billionaire Bruce Mathieson ($135,000) operated more than 12,000 gaming machine licences as co-owner of Australian Leisure and Hospitality (ALH), the nation’s biggest hotel and pub group. 

In 2019, the Woolworths hotel business accounted for about 10 per cent of the supermarket giant’s total earnings. 

ALH has since merged with the supermarket giant’s liquor retail arm to form Endeavour Group. Mathieson and Woolworths each hold a 14.6 per cent interest in Endeavour. 

Len Ainsworth ($53,460) founded the world’s second-biggest gaming machine company Aristocrat Leisure.

Drawing on expertise in neuroscience and behavioural psychology, it developed the modern poker machine — a high-intensity electronic machine designed to keep people playing longer and faster.

The result, named an “electronic gaming machine” or EGM, was described by Tasmania-based historian James Boyce as “one of the most life-destroying design innovations in Australian history”. 

United Voice — the hospitality workers union representing casino, hotel, pub and club workers — contributed $6.78 million, mostly to the ALP.

In NSW, United Voice struck a deal with Crown, which saw the union drop its opposition to smoking in the Sydney casino’s high-roller gambling rooms and sign an MOU to become a Crown Sydney Hotel Resort project partner.

Its predecessor, the Liquor Hospitality and Miscellaneous Workers Union, was on the Ministerial Advisory Group on gambling reform in 2010-11.

Two associated entities linked to the ALP’s ACT branch, the Canberra Labor Club ($9.36m) and investment vehicle 1973 Foundation ($3.77m), together contributed $13.14 million.

The term “associated entities” refers to any organisation run by or acting for a political party. This includes fundraising bodies and investment vehicles set up by political parties, as well as party-aligned unions.

Gambling businesses tipped $14.46 million into political coffers, with Tabcorp ($3.95m, now merged with TAB Ltd and Tatts), Crown ($3.25m) and The Star Entertainment Group ($1.77m) among the biggest donors.

Hotels, pubs and clubs gave $35.95 million — more than twice as much as casinos, lotteries and other gambling businesses combined. 

Roughly 60 per cent came from two organisations: industry lobby groups the Australian Hotels Association ($14.73m) and ClubsNSW, also known as Clubs Australia ($6.55m). ClubsNSW members operate roughly 70,000 pokies machines.

About 290 individual hotels, clubs and pubs contributed a combined $14.67 million.

Excluded from the overall analysis of gambling-related payments are contributions paid to and disclosed by three groups: the Shop Distributive and Allied Employees Association, or “Shoppies” union; the Construction Forestry Mining Manufacturing and Energy Union (CFMMEU); and the Canberra Labor Club.

All three are associated with the ALP.

The CFMMEU reported detailed receipts totalling $17.99 million, including $17.37 million from the Canberra Tradesmen’s Union Club ($18.88m), also known as “Tradies”.

Tradies was established in 1964 by the unions that would later become the CFMMEU. It operates 300 gaming machines, making it the ACT’s largest pokies operator after the Canberra Labor Club group.

Separate figures show the CFMMEU and its branches contributed $18.77 million in donations, subscriptions and other receipts to political parties over 22 years, including $18.1 million to the ALP. 

The Shoppies union, a major financial backer and powerful factional force linked to the ALP, disclosed $54.46 million in detailed receipts, including $46.6 million from Woolworths and $7.84 million from Coles.

The union has previously come under fire for striking deals with the supermarket giants that slashed penalty rates and left workers millions of dollars out of pocket. 

Separate returns show the Shoppies transferred just under $20.38 million in donations, subscriptions, and other receipts to political parties over 22 years, including $20.32 million to the ALP.

The Canberra Labor Club group disclosed more than $460 million in detailed receipts.

The group operates more than 400 gaming machines. It was set up by ACT Labor to support the party, and its articles of association require any profits to be paid to the branch.

In 2019-20 it generated $9.95 million in net gaming machine revenue (excluding tax and player winnings).

Roughly $330 million paid to the Canberra Labor Club is from ATM and EFTPOS suppliers. 

These groups had a keen interest in the 2010 Productivity Commission inquiry into problem gambling, which considered an outright ban on ATMs in gaming rooms.

The commission stopped short of a ban, instead recommending that governments fine-tune regulations to limit cash withdrawals, position ATM and EFTPOS facilities out of sight of gamblers, and ensure warnings and help messages were clearly visible on these facilities. 

ATM and EFTPOS suppliers, via industry lobby groups ATM Industry Reference Group and ATM Industry Association, opposed the Productivity Commission’s recommendations. They were backed by gambling industry heavyweights including the Australian Hotels Association, Clubs Australia and the Australian Casino Association.

‘Impossibly compromised’

These payments to the Shoppies, the CFMMEU and the Canberra Labor Club — totalling more than $615 million — are disclosed in associated entity returns lodged with the AEC. The majority of payments are categorised as “Other Receipt” or “Unspecified”.

The ABC has excluded these payments from the overall analysis of gambling contributions because it isn’t clear how much of this funding has wound up in the political system.

Disclosure rules require associated entities to disclose their payments, debts and receipts. This includes electoral expenditure, political donations and details of receipts and debts above the disclosure threshold.

All receipts must be disclosed, even if they do not benefit a political party.

Some associated entities, such as the ACT Labor-linked 1973 Foundation, have been set up to raise income for a party, so it’s reasonable to assume that most of the money ends up in the hands of that party, Monash’s Charles Livingstone says.

However, this is less likely to be true for entities such as party-aligned unions, which have significant operational expenses beyond supporting a political party.

This is further muddied by reporting practices that make it difficult to track where payments are really going.

The Canberra Labor Group, for example, channels funds through the 1973 Foundation, which was reportedly set up to shift ACT Labor’s finances into real estate. Returns lodged by the 1973 Foundation show it received $2.5 million from the Canberra Labor Club in 2013-14 and $378,538 in 2010-11.

However, this money trail is not obvious from the Canberra Labor Club’s disclosures to the AEC. The Canberra Labor Club has never reported any payments to the 1973 Foundation in these returns, nor has it disclosed any payments to ACT Labor after 2004-05, despite the branch’s returns showing it has received more than $4.1 million from the Canberra Labor Club since then.

Adding to the opaqueness is the enormity of the amounts disclosed by the Canberra Labor Club group and the sheer number of payments, which include amounts as little as $1,500.

The Labor Party has made moves to divest from the Canberra Labor Club group over the years, however, these were ultimately stymied by forces within the party, Livingstone says.

It’s little wonder. More than $10 million of the $12.45 million disclosed by ACT Labor since 1998-99 has come from the Canberra Labor Club and the 1973 Foundation, according to figures compiled by the Greens’ Democracy For Sale project.

“It raises a significant conflict of interest for the Labor Party … to actually be regulating gambling machines when the party has a really powerful vested interest. They’re impossibly compromised,” Livingstone says.

Neither the Canberra Labor Club nor the ALP responded to requests for comment.

This chart shows the flow of money from gambling interests to political parties, associated entities or political campaigners/third parties between 1998-99 and 2019-20. 

Top of Form

Democracy under attack

To the uninitiated, political donations can seem like a pricey game — especially given explicit quid pro quo is rare, says Grattan Institute CEO Danielle Wood. But money talks, research shows.

“It’s about access and relationships,” she says.

“It’s about that opportunity to bend the ear of politicians on a regular basis so when issues do arise, they’re already very familiar with the views of those that support them.”

A 2018 Grattan Institute report on access and influence in Australian politics found that highly regulated industries tended to be the most politically active, punching well above their economic weight on donations, commercial lobbying contacts and meetings with senior ministers.

The gambling industry was “probably the most stark” example of this outsized generosity, says Wood, who co-authored the report.

“On top of that, it seems to be an industry that is a bit more active or open about using donations to get a particular policy outcome. More of a sledgehammer than a scalpel compared to other donors.”

The deeper problem with the donations system, however, is the lack of transparency. Over two decades, roughly 35 per cent of private funding to political parties, about $1 billion, has remained hidden from public scrutiny, according to analysis from the Centre for Public Integrity.

Two loopholes in the federal disclosure system make this not only possible, but also legal.

The first is the high disclosure threshold. In 2020-21, the disclosure threshold for donations, which rises yearly based on inflation, climbed to $14,300, meaning only donations above this amount need to be disclosed.

The second is that political parties are not obliged to aggregate multiple donations from the same donor before applying the limit. This leads to “donation splitting”, where donors can hide payments by splitting them into multiple amounts below the threshold.

Another critical flaw is the absence of caps on either donations or political spending, which has the potential to allow a handful of big donors to exercise substantial control over a party’s financial position.

Also, disclosure data is released only yearly in February, which means the public may wait up to 19 months to find out which groups donated the most to each party ahead of an election.

“There’s just simply no reason why we should be waiting anywhere near as long as we are to see donations,” Wood says.

The lack of transparency, low levels of spending controls and poor enforcement have combined to create some of the weakest donations laws in the developed world.

“This is the democratic process that is under attack,” says Anthony Whealy, chair of the Centre for Public Integrity and a former Court of Appeal judge.

“Participation in the democratic process is a good thing … However, where it becomes excessive, where it becomes uncontrolled, or unbridled and where transparency is lacking, then political donations actually become a threat to democracy.”

The Australian Hotels Association did not respond to requests for comment.

However, a ClubsNSW spokesperson said: “All political donations made by ClubsNSW are declared, made transparent through the relevant authorities and comply with the law … Politicians and political parties which support not-for-profit clubs deserve to be supported.”

A Liberal Party spokesperson said the party does not accept funds that are “subject to political conditions of any kind”.

“Australia’s political parties are subject to a rigorous funding and financial disclosure regime … In recent years, the Coalition government has strengthened this regime by banning foreign donations and better regulating third party campaigners.”

It said political parties have large volunteer wings and limited resources, and it does not support reforms that would “unnecessarily add to the already considerable administrative and compliance burdens” placed on them.

This is the first part of an ABC investigation into political payments from the gambling industry. Future stories will examine the political timing of the industry’s donations and state and territory data on political donations.

Credits

Reporting and data: Inga Ting
Development: Nathanael Scott, Katia Shatoba
Design: Alex Palmer
Research: Michael Workman, Anna Freeland, Stephen Hutcheon

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2021-10-14/how-the-gambling-industry-cashed-in-on-political-donations/100509026