An important committee in the ACT Assembly has recommended against all poker machines being linked in a network so that compulsive gamblers could be blocked by the whole system when they reached pre-set limits on their losses.
The system (which would mean that pokies gamblers couldn't switch machines to get round any block) is used in every other part of Australia.
But the ACT's Standing Committee on Justice and Community Safety recommended "that the ACT Government does not commit to an ACT wide central monitoring system before fully exploring cashless gaming options".
These other "cashless gaming options" include systems where gamblers have their own cards to put in machines.
But critics of this cashless, un-networked system say it's easy to get round blocks. The campaigners for tougher rules say the whole network of machines has to "know" a gambler's situation.
The committee also recommended that the ACT government "urgently explore the implementation of the use of facial recognition technology in community clubs".
This accords with what many of the clubs in the ACT want. They argue that facial recognition cameras could spot problem gamblers so staff could then bar them.
But the campaigners for tougher measures say that facial recognition would only spot gamblers who had already come forward to admit they had a problem.
The issue of gambling harm has come into focus for two reasons: (1) Tasmania is introducing networked machines along with a robust system to keep gamblers within limits to their losses on the machines, limits they would decide far from the excitement of the pokies room.
And (2) because of the case of Raimo Kasurinen who took his own life after losing hundreds of thousands of dollars on poker machines at the Hellenic Club.
His family said he had been given meals for free, sometimes at the poker machines.
Bank records seen by The Canberra Times also indicate that he was allowed to withdraw hundreds of dollars in batches over less than two minutes from an EFTPOS machine at the club.
The ACT MLS's committee was made up of Peter Cain (Liberals), Marisa Paterson (Labor) and Andrew Braddock (Greens).
Mr Braddock disagreed with the other two.
"We are operating in an environment where any advice received from the gaming machine operators and gaming technology lobbyists needs to be interpreted with extreme caution," he said.
"The companies and organisations working in this space have proven over the years to be disingenuous."
He said Labor was conflicted on the issue because of the four Labor Clubs in the ACT.
"The Labor party remains the ultimate controller and beneficiary of poker machine assets at four of the ACT's licensed clubs. What impacts the profitability of the clubs in turn impacts their own interests.
"Until Labor representatives are prepared to come out and back the recommendations of harm minimisation advocates, I am forced to continue to presume the Labor caucus is captive of the industry."
