smh.com.au
Crown Resorts lobbies for poker machines at Barangaroo, defying prior agreement
Crown Resorts is lobbying the NSW government to install 500 cashless poker machines at Barangaroo, despite a prior agreement not to have them, raising concerns about gambling harm and government accountability; an audit revealed it would take 55 years to reach the national average of poker machines at the current reduction rate.
- How does Crown Resorts' lobbying effort fit into the broader context of gambling regulation in NSW, considering the auditor-general's report and the failed cashless gambling trial?
- This lobbying effort by Crown Resorts follows a failed government trial of cashless gambling and an auditor-general report revealing that at the current rate, it would take 55 years for NSW to reach the national average of poker machines per capita. The report also highlighted the lack of government targets to reduce gambling harm, further emphasizing the severity of the issue. The $8.4 billion profit generated by poker machines in NSW underscores the significant financial stakes.
- What are the immediate consequences of Crown Resorts' attempt to introduce poker machines at Barangaroo, and what does this reveal about the NSW government's commitment to gambling harm reduction?
- Crown Resorts, an Australian casino group, is lobbying the NSW government to install 500 cashless poker machines at its Barangaroo casino, despite a previous agreement to operate without poker machines. This action disregards the government's commitment to reducing poker machine numbers and disrespects the public trust.
- What are the potential long-term implications of allowing Crown Resorts to install poker machines, and what measures can the NSW government take to prevent future breaches of licensing agreements and prioritize public health?
- The NSW government's response will set a critical precedent. Continued inaction on reducing poker machine numbers, especially in light of Crown's actions, could embolden other gambling operators and exacerbate the existing problem of gambling harm in NSW. The government must demonstrate a clear commitment to prioritizing public health over industry interests.
Cognitive Concepts
Framing Bias
The narrative frames Crown Resorts as irresponsible and manipulative, highlighting their lobbying efforts and breach of promise. The headline and introduction strongly suggest Crown Resorts' actions are unethical and detrimental to the public interest. The emphasis on the negative consequences of gambling and Crown's role in exacerbating them shapes the reader's perception.
Language Bias
The article uses loaded language such as "prey on," "sleight of hand," "treats the people of NSW with contempt," and "irresponsibly gambled." These terms create a negative and accusatory tone towards Crown Resorts. More neutral alternatives could include 'targeted,' 'maneuver,' 'disregarded,' and 'acted without sufficient consideration'. The repeated use of "gambling harm" emphasizes the negative impact of gambling.
Bias by Omission
The article focuses heavily on Crown Resorts' actions and the NSW government's response, but omits discussion of the perspectives of Crown Resorts or the potential economic benefits of their proposal. It also doesn't detail the specific arguments made by Crown Resorts in lobbying for the poker machines. While acknowledging the negative impacts of gambling, it doesn't present a balanced view of the potential positive economic implications of the casino industry.
False Dichotomy
The article presents a false dichotomy by framing the issue as either reducing poker machine numbers or allowing Crown Resorts to install cashless machines. It ignores the possibility of alternative solutions or compromises, such as exploring different regulatory models or implementing stricter harm-reduction measures.
Sustainable Development Goals
The article highlights how Crown Resorts, a casino group, is lobbying the government to increase the number of poker machines, disproportionately impacting vulnerable populations and exacerbating existing inequalities in gambling addiction and financial hardship. The focus on high-roller gambling initially excluded local populations, and now the push for more poker machines further disadvantages lower-income individuals more susceptible to problem gambling.