Community outrage at pokies approval
3 February, 2012
In a shock decision announced this afternoon, the Victorian Commission for Gambling Regulation has ruled in favour of a proposal to treble the number of electronic gaming machines in Castlemaine.
‘This is a devastating decision’, says Enough Pokies in Castlemaine (EPIC) president, David Stretch. ‘This case was a litmus test for whether the Commission will listen to communities. Castlemaine has spoken louder than any other community before it, and still the Commission wants to let more pokies in.’
The Maryborough Highland Society applied to the Commission for approval of a venue with 65 pokies in the heart of Castlemaine. The application was heard in January this year. The Commission found that the net social and economic impact of the proposal would be neutral, and so the application was approved.
‘An independent survey showed that over 70 percent of the community oppose this proposal. If Castlemaine can’t win, no-one can’, Mr Stretch said.
The local Mount Alexander Shire Council opposed the development due to its anticipated negative social and economic impacts. An unprecedented 574 individual objections from the community were received by the Commission. EPIC, a grassroots organisation reflecting the views of the overwhelming majority of the community, made representative submissions to the Commission.
‘The Government’s dependency on poker machine revenue has become so pervasive that the legislative regime allows governments to ride rough-shod over the express wishes of communities and local governments, in favour of a quick dollar.
‘This Commission hearing is just the beginning of this battle: it took Romsey five years to keep the pokies out.
‘We have to keep fighting, not just for Castlemaine, but for other communities who will face the pokies juggernaut in the future’, Mr Stretch said.
EPIC and the majority of the Castlemaine community now call on Council to continue acting in the best interests of the town by appealing the decision to VCAT. The Council has 28 days to lodge an appeal.
Read about other lies from the poker machine industry
Read the complete archive of poker machine stories by clicking the problem gambler at left
Posted in Economics, Environment, Featured slide, Featured Story, Health, Live in Castlemaine, Local Government, Local news, Politics, Social Justice
February 3rd, 2012 at 9:09 pm
I am both angered and saddened by this very bad news. We simply cannot underestimate the horrors of the Bailiieu government. He is in bed with the brown coal lobby and wants the tax from gaming to prop up organisations like VicForrests. Our beautiful state is indeed in peril.
Lets put our energy behind the Shire and EPIC, David Stretch and all the other workers. Never give up!
February 3rd, 2012 at 9:28 pm
The most disturbing aspect of this decision by the Commission for Gambling is the total and unprecedented disregard for the community’s voice and opinion.
It is like EPIC does not or never has existed.
The community of Castlemaine who opposed the highlanders unwanted 65 poker machines might has well have done nothing and said nothing because the Commission for Gambling merely dismissed the community attitude as a problematic noisy nuisance.
There is much within the Commission for Gambling’s decision for a trip to VCAT and we do love a visit there here in Castlemaine.
February 3rd, 2012 at 10:28 pm
Outrageous!
Our community has spoken loud and clear – 574 objections from a community of 20,000. And the Gaming Authority is “not convinced that the detrimental effects will outweigh the benefits” , of 65 highly addictive, deceptive ‘gaming machines’ on our community: its’ economy, families,children, and wellbeing.
An example of the power and influence of vested interests writ large.
February 4th, 2012 at 8:28 am
Is this a frightening sign of things to come – Baillieu, then Abbott, a stamping on people’s rights! Democracy gone mad.
We battled long and hard to save the Chewton pool. It was within hours of being demolished, so we set up a tent embassy at the site. As that classic slogan says, ‘a people united will never be defeated.’ We won’t let the Highland Society win.
February 4th, 2012 at 10:34 am
This is a very disappointing decision and does seem to show disregard for the strong community feeling against pokies.
We all need to support an application to VCAT.
February 4th, 2012 at 11:00 am
It’s unbelievable. As a business person, I know that Castlemaine will never be the same if this happens. 50% of the town’s income arrives here from visitors who love Castlemaine because it ISN’T like Melbourne’s outer suburbs. The other 50% comes from those who love Castlemaine’s unique qualities & business mix. Some of our new restaurants and existing small business will go under from this decision.
February 4th, 2012 at 12:48 pm
This farce of a decision is just one more step towards building a nation-wide movement to force the Australian Government to better establish just who can place poker machines where, how much money they can extract from who, and explain why they’re even permitted there in the first place!
In the end, after substantial reform has taken place within poker machine regulations, and they find that they lose not only in Castlemaine, but in Kyneton and Maryborough also, the Maryborough Highland Society may end up wishing they hadn’t won this round after all.
This fight is far from over.
February 4th, 2012 at 1:15 pm
Everybody should add a comment to this article in the Age while its up:
http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/gaming-commission-refuses-to-block-new-castlemaine-pokies-20120203-1qxv3.html#comments
February 4th, 2012 at 8:37 pm
Report starts off with a bit of hyperbole. Why was the decision a shock when everyone knew if could go either way. Anyway, keep up the fight.
February 4th, 2012 at 9:24 pm
This decision has more holes in it than the Castlemaine pool!
The community outrage at these findings is well justified given the way the commission literally dismissed both the Council and EPIC’s submissions. And as for attacking the professional integrity of the senior council officer………this report wouldn’t get a “D” in first year leagal studies.
The opening paragraph, and repeated in the conclusion, reads like an advertisement for the MHS; quite unjustified and highly unprofessional from a statutory authority! This is beyond appalling.
Unfortunately there are no appeal rights to the commission itself under the Act, so off to VCAT we go.
Please everybody dig as deep as you can to contribute to the costs of expert witnesses etc. This is going to be one EPIC fight! The council have already suggested reluctance to fund an appeal.
A license is one thing, but planning permission is another – watch this space.
February 5th, 2012 at 11:16 am
Phil I just read the report.
Whilst I agree that it was heavily biased towards the glowing good deeds of the Maryborough Highland Society -and dismmissive of this community as a unique culture in favour of a generic one size fits all approach – they did not ‘attack the integrity’ of a senior council officer.
Apprehended bias is a legal term. They acknowledged that they did not question her professionalism – they simply stated that as a former EPIC member who had been active in the campaign – her testimony had to bear less weight. Apprehended bias is that you must be impartial and be SEEN to be impartial.
February 5th, 2012 at 11:30 am
I’m not surprised in the slightest that the pokies were approved. Whilst most people would agree that pokies are bad for the community, it could be argued that cigarettes and alcohol, which are sold throughout the town, are as equally detrimental. Where do we stop the ban? Having said that, I don’t like any of it and wish all of it was banned but prohibition rarely ever works.
February 5th, 2012 at 12:47 pm
The determination can be read here – http://www.vcgr.vic.gov.au/CA256F800017E8D4/Meetings/AA83563E8D9EC9A0CA25785B001DDA89?Open
At points 61-63, council’s assessment of the detrimental comunity impact is dismissed as ‘biased’ because the presenter was personally not in favour of more pokies.
Strangely, MHS witnesses who have a similar bias in favour of pokies, and having been expert witnesses to support them before did not have their evidence dismissed because of their biases.
Points 88 – 90 tell us we’ll get over our negative attitudes to the venue once we see the positive economic benefits!
Evidence that was general or statewide in nature was dismissed as not being location specific. Comparisons to the Romsey and Jan Juc refusal decisions didn’t apply because they didn’t already have pokies and we do.
Of the few cases where the VCGR’s decisions have been overturned at VCAT, the only time it happens is when new evidence is presented by independent expert witnesses presenting information that is location specific.
February 5th, 2012 at 1:47 pm
Attacking the professional integrity of a senior council officer who joined a lobby group and then presented an independent report into the same issue is pretty reasonable I would have thought.
It is a blunder of amazing proportions.
February 5th, 2012 at 3:17 pm
There’s a puzzle in all this: who exactly is in favour of the pokies and, whoever they are, why are they so quiet (apart from the odd person who says they’d like the cheap meals etc)? And why did the MHS never disown whoever was vandalising the EPIC signs? Was it by MHS direction? Were they so confident that they saw no need to distance themselves from the yobbos?
February 5th, 2012 at 5:03 pm
I don’t like pokies, so I simply do not play.
If those that are so outraged by this decision truly wanted to help problem gamblers then they should stop being hypocrites and also condemn online gambling.
Due to its anonymity, this is far worse than gaming machines.
The truth is that gambling exists, our taxes are maintained because governments profit from it – so we should all just suck it up, or alternatively start the fight against all forms of gambling, and accept that if successful then we will need to cover the lost revenue in some other way.
February 5th, 2012 at 5:19 pm
Thanks for the clarification Andrea – it all amounts to the same thing – commission bias in favour of perpetuating a damaging industry.
February 5th, 2012 at 9:08 pm
Gordan – you suck it up and then figure out how governments can tax online gambling !
February 10th, 2012 at 3:22 pm
Great, thanks for sharing this article.
February 11th, 2012 at 12:42 pm
What people continually forget is that while the pokies may be a Castlemaine issue the involvement of the Council makes it a Shire issue.
And I agree with Tom Tucker. The person concerned should not have been the one to provide advice to Councillors because to quote Andrea Ross “apprehended bias”.
What people fail to see is the broader implications of this and how it may apply to other branches of our Council possibly leading to the present contention and division in the community.