THE truth is out there but in the world of gaming machine reform, it’s anyone’s guess as to exactly what legislation, if any, the government will consider in the lead-up to this year’s budget.
After days of speculation that the Labor Federal Government was set to renege on the deal with independent MP Andrew Wilkie to introduce mandatory pre-commitment requirements as the centrepoint of reforms aimed at reducing problem gambling, Mr Wilkie himself made the strongest recommendation that he remained steadfast in holding Prime Minister Julia Gillard to the deal.
Given the speculation which has flowed since Mr Wilkie met Ms Gillard to discuss the reforms on the weekend, it could have been easy for the independent MP to lash the government yesterday.
Instead, he painted a picture of a man who remains in control of the power he holds.
This is despite the significant change in the political landscape caused by the elevation of Coalition MP Peter Slipper to the speaker’s chair in the House of Representatives.
That move means Labor now holds a two-seat majority, enough to not need Mr Wilkie’s vote to progress legislation.
Given Mr Wilkie’s proposal for gaming machine reform is highly unpopular in some sectors of the community – particularly New South Wales and Queensland where the big clubs which act as a community hub are largely underpinned by gaming revenue – the government will no doubt be concerned by the potential election impacts.
It’s why the extra leverage created by Mr Slipper’s elevation provides it with greater leeway to negotiate a solution with Mr Wilkie which achieves reform without community backlash.
Herein lies Ms Gillard’s problem. As Opposition Leader Tony Abbott suggested yesterday, any attempts by the government to renegotiate the deal struck with Mr Wilkie will be construed as a broken promise.
Given Mr Abbott is already promoting the government as lacking trust over its decision to implement a Carbon Tax, it is a proposition which cannot be dismissed.
It is telling that many rank-and-file Labor members would see reforms of gaming machines as an issue on which the government should be leading, rather than negotiating.
This is not the case and the public can in the meantime only guess how important the government sees the impact of gambling problems in society being, judged by the solution which must be presented in the coming weeks.