IGN has obtained a copy of a speech delivered by David Rice, the newly appointed director of gaming for Australia's Northern Territory, where Lasseters Casino recently became the first traditional casino in the First World to launch an online casino. The speech, given at the 1999 Australasian Casino and Gaming Regulators' Conference, covers Rice's views on Internet gambling and the way it should be handled in Australia.
The transcript was given to us in all CAPs. We apologize for yelling at you, but time constraints dictated that we keep it that way.
1999 AUSTRALASIAN CASINO AND GAMING REGULATORS' CONFERENCE
APRIL 1999
LAUNCH OF LASSETERS INTERNET CASINO
SPEAKER: DAVID RICE, DIRECTOR OF GAMING (NT)
THANK YOU FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK TO YOU TODAY.
I HAVE BEEN ASKED TO MAKE SOME COMMENTS ABOUT INTERNET GAMING.
I AM HAPPY TO DO SO BUT I MUST MAKE THE USUAL QUALIFICATION - ANY VIEWS I EXPRESS ARE MY OWN AND DO NOT NECESSARILY REPRESENT THE VIEWS OF EITHER THE NORTHERN TERRITORY GOVERNMENT OR THE DEPARTMENT OF INDUSTRIES AND BUSINESS OF WHICH I AM PART.
AS THE NEWLY APPOINTED DIRECTOR OF GAMING IN THE NORTHERN TERRITORY, I HAVE HAD TO QUICKLY BECOME FAMILIAR WITH INTERNET GAMING.
IT IS OBVIOUS THAT THE USE OF THE INTERNET AND OTHER INTERACTIVE TECHNOLOGY FOR GAMBLING RAISES A NUMBER OF COMPLEX POLICY ISSUES.
TODAY, I WOULD LIKE TO TOUCH ON SOME OF THOSE ISSUES AND OFFER MY PERSONAL VIEWS.
THE BANNING OPTION
THERE ARE SOME PEOPLE WHO WISH TO BAN GAMBLING ON THE INTERNET OUTRIGHT.
THIS SEEMS TO ME TO BE A DIFFICULT OPTION TO SUSTAIN.
ALREADY, AUSTRALIANS ARE ABLE TO ACCESS HUNDREDS OF INTERNET GAMING SITES BASED IN A NUMBER OF COUNTRIES ALL AROUND THE WORLD.
AUSTRALIANS ARE DOING SO AND ARE BETTING WITH THE OPERATORS OF THESE SITES.
BUT MANY OF THESE COUNTRIES IN WHICH THESE SITES ARE BASED HAVE AN UNCERTAIN REGULATORY REPUTATION, AND THE INTEGRITY OF SOME OF THESE OPERATIONS IS QUESTIONABLE.
BUT I WOULD UNDERLINE THE KEY POINT - AUSTRALIANS ARE ALREADY GAMBLING USING THE INTERNET.
TO MY MIND, THE IDEA THAT WE HAVE A CLEAN SLATE AND CAN EFFECTIVELY "BAN" THIS ACTIVITY DOESN'T SEEM TO BE A SUSTAINABLE OPTION.
IF IT IS OCCURRING NOW, AND IS GROWING, AND THERE ARE NO FEASIBLE TECHNICAL MEANS OF STOPPING IT (A MATTER, I NOTE, OF SOME DEBATE), WHERE DO WE GO?
I UNDERSTAND THAT WHEN AUSTRALIAN GAMING REGULATORS LOOKED AT THIS QUESTION IN THE PAST, THEY FELT THE BEST OPTION WAS TO OFFER A SOUND, REGULATED ALTERNATIVE.
THIS SEEMS TO ME TO BE A SENSIBLE CONCLUSION.
THE BEST OPTION TO PROTECT THE INTEREST OF PLAYERS SEEMS TO BE TO OFFER A GAMING SITE WHERE REGULATED, WHICH MEANS:
- THE PROBITY OF THE OPERATOR HAS BEEN ASSESSED;
- THE TECHNICAL INTEGRITY OF THE SITE HAS BEEN EVALUATED;
- THE GAMES ARE FAIR;
- PLAYER'S FUNDS ARE PROTECTED; AND,
- IN THE EVENT OF A DISPUTE, THE PLAYER IS ABLE TO SEEK THE ASSISTANCE OF AN INDEPENDENT REGULATOR.
THIS IS WHAT WE ARE DOING IN THE NORTHERN TERRITORY WITH LASSETERS INTERNET CASINO.
THE PROBITY OF THE OPERATOR AND ALL KEY STAFF HAS BEEN ASSESSED. THIS PERSONAL SCRUTINY WILL BE ONGOING.
THE TECHNICAL FUNCTIONALITY OF THE SITE HAS BEEN SUBJECTED TO MOST INTENSIVE SCRUTINY BY "IT" EXPERTS AGAINST WORLD'S "BEST PRACTICE".
THE NATURE OF THE INTERNET MEANS THAT THIS IS AN EVER-CHANGING MEDIUM AND WE NEED TO CHANGE AND ADAPT TO KEEP PACE.
THIS CONSTANT CHANGE AND DEVELOPMENT MEANS THAT YOU CAN NEVER BE SATISFIED WITH TECHNICAL SECURITY - AND IT IS A REGULATORY REQUIREMENT THAT LASSETERS KEEPS PACE WITH TECHNICAL DEVELOPMENTS AND INNOVATIONS.
THAT BEING SAID, NO CHANGE MAY BE MADE TO ANY ASPECT OF THE SYSTEM WITHOUT APPROVAL.
A KEY FEATURE IS GAME FAIRNESS. MILLIONS OF SIMULATED GAMES HAVE BEEN PLAYED TO VERIFY THEIR FAIRNESS.
OF COURSE, THE MOST ATTENTION HAS BEEN GIVEN TO THE "BACKEND" AND THE STEPS TAKEN TO PROTECT PLAYER'S FUNDS AND TO ENSURE THE SECURITY OF THE OVERALL SYSTEM.
BUT TECHNICAL INTEGRITY IS BUT ONE PART OF SOUND REGULATION.
INDEPENDENT OVERSIGHT IS ALSO REQUIRED.
AS THE DIRECTOR OF GAMING I HAVE EXTENSIVE POWERS IN RESPECT OF THE OPERATION OF THE SITE. FOR EXAMPLE, I AM ABLE TO ISSUE DIRECTIONS TO THE OPERATOR TO CHANGE ANY ASPECT OF ITS OPERATIONS.
I AM ALSO VESTED WITH THE POWER TO RESOLVE DISPUTES.
SOCIAL IMPACTS
ANOTHER MAJOR ISSUE THAT ARISES WITH INTERNET GAMING IS THE SOCIAL IMPACT OF THIS FORM OF GAMING - SUCH THINGS AS "PROBLEM GAMBLING" AND ACCESS BY CHILDREN.
I SHARE THESE CONCERNS.
BUT RATHER THAN TRYING TO BAN THE USE OF THE NEW TECHNOLOGY FOR GAMING, WHAT WE ARE DOING IN THE TERRITORY WITH THE LASSETERS SITE SHOWS HOW THE NEW TECHNOLOGY CAN BE USED TO ACHIEVE TO HELP "RESPONSIBLE GAMING" PRACTICES.
I FEEL THE LASSETERS SITE SETS NEW STANDARDS IN RESPONSIBLE GAMBLING AND I WOULD LIKE TO MENTION SOME OF ITS FEATURES.
FIRST, THE SITE PROVIDES ACCESS TO PROBLEM GAMBLING INFORMATION WRITTEN BY GAMBLING COUNSELLORS.
AS WE KNOW, IDENTIFYING PROBLEM GAMBLERS IS VERY DIFFICULT.
ON THE LASSETERS SITE, A PLAYER IS ABLE TO ACCESS A CHECKLIST TO SEE IF HE OR SHE IS DEVELOPING A GAMBLING PROBLEM.
IF A PLAYER HAS ANY CONCERNS ABOUT THEIR PATTERN OF PLAY, THEY ARE ABLE TO PRESS A BUTTON AND THEY WILL BE EXCLUDED FROM THE SITE FOR SEVEN DAYS.
IF THE BUTTON IS PRESSED THREE TIMES, THE PLAYER IS EXCLUDED PERMANENTLY.
THE PLAYER IS ALSO ABLE TO REVIEW THEIR PREVIOUS GAME HISTORY. THIS HELPS A PLAYER DETECT ANY EXCESSIVE PLAY.
THE SITE ENABLES PLAYERS TO SET THEIR OWN BET LIMITS, WHICH AGAIN HELPS MODERATE EXCESSIVE PLAY.
I WOULD ASK THOSE WHO CRITICISE THIS FORM OF GAMING DUE TO CONCERNS ABOUT "PROBLEM GAMBLING" TO SHOW ME ONE GAMING MACHINE ANYWHERE IN THE WORLD THAT OFFERS THESE FEATURES.
ANOTHER CONCERN IS ACCESS BY CHILDREN TO GAMING SITES.
AGAIN, THIS IS A CONCERN THAT I SHARE.
THE OPERATOR OF THE LASSETERS SITE IS REQUIRED TO DO EVERYTHING IT CAN TO RESTRICT ACCESS BY CHILDREN.
OF COURSE, A REGISTERED PLAYER WILL NEED TO USE A PASSWORD TO ACCESS THE SITE.
BUT WE HAVE AUGMENTED THIS COMMON PRACTICE.
IT IS A REGULATORY REQUIREMENT THAT THE SITE PROVIDE ACCESS TO FILTERING SOFTWARE - SUCH THINGS AS "NET NANNY" OR "CYBER PATROL".
THE ONLY METHOD OF ACCESS IS BY MEANS OF A CREDIT CARD.
THE USE OF CREDIT CARDS RAISES ISSUES OF ITS OWN, BUT IF A BUSINESS IS ON THE INTERNET, IT NEEDS TO BE ABLE TO ACCEPT PAYMENT BY MEANS OF CREDIT CARDS - OVER 50% OF ALL COMMERCIAL TRANSACTIONS ON THE INTERNET ARE BY MEANS OF CREDIT CARDS.
AS CREDIT CARDS, IN THE MAIN, ARE ONLY ISSUED TO PERSONS OVER 18 YEARS OF AGE AND AFTER A "100 POINT" CHECK, THIS GIVES SOME CONFIDENCE THAT THE PLAYER IS NOT A MINOR.
HOWEVER, WE RECOGNISE THAT IT IS POSSIBLE FOR CHILDREN TO OBTAIN CREDIT CARDS.
THIS IS ONE OF THE REASONS WHY LASSETERS IS REQUIRED TO UNDERTAKE BACKGROUND CHECKS ON ALL REGISTRATION DETAILS, AND SEEK PROOF OF IDENTITY AND AGE IF THOSE CHECKS ARE NOT SATISFIED.
AS A FURTHER CONTROL, LASSETERS WILL ONLY MAKE PAYMENTS BY MEANS OF PERSONAL, NOT NEGOTIABLE CHEQUE MADE OUT IN THE NAME OF THE PLAYER.
THIS HELPS MEET THE CONCERN THAT IS SOMETIMES EXPRESSED THAT A CHILD WILL STEAL THE PARENT'S CREDIT CARD AND BE UNDETECTED IN THEIR PLAY.
UNDER THIS PAYMENT SYSTEM, THE CHILD WILL RECEIVE NO FINANCIAL BENEFIT, AND BECAUSE THE CHEQUE IS MADE OUT IN THE NAME OF THE PARENT, THE CHILD'S ACTIVITY IS ABLE TO BE DETECTED BY THE PERSON MOST DIRECTLY AFFECTED.
BUT WITH CREDIT CARDS COME NEW CONCERNS - THE SO-CALLED "CLICK YOUR MOUSE AND LOSE YOUR HOUSE" IDEA.
THIS STRIKES ME AS MORE OF A SUB-EDITOR'S THROWAWAY LINE, THAN A VALID EXPRESSION OF POLICY CONCERN - BUT THESE "GRAB LINES" ARE UNFORTUNATELY A FEATURE OF DISCUSSIONS ABOUT INTERNET GAMING, WHERE PERCEPTIONS RATHER THAN REALITIES ARE AT PLAY.
AS I SAID EARLIER, IT SEEMS TO ME YOU NEED TO ALLOW THE USE OF CREDIT CARDS BECAUSE THAT IS WHAT THE INTERNET DEMANDS, BUT THIS MUST BE BALANCED WITH THE RESPONSIBLE GAMBLING OBJECTIVE.
TO THIS END, THERE IS A LIMIT OF $500 A MONTH THAT MAY BE DEPOSITED FOR GAMING WITH LASSETERS.
AGAIN, I ASK ANY CRITIC OF THIS FORM OF GAMBLING TO SHOW ME ANY OTHER GAMBLING OPERATION THAT APPLIES SUCH LIMITS.
THE USE OF A PERSONAL, NOT-NEGOTIABLE CHEQUE AS THE ONLY PERMITTED PAYMENT MECHANISM ALSO "BACK-ENDS" THE SO-CALLED "100 POINT" CHECK FOR IDENTITY.
IN ESSENCE, YOU MUST HAVE A BANK ACCOUNT IN THE REGISTERED NAME TO BE ABLE TO DEPOSIT YOUR CHEQUE AND ACCESS YOUR FUNDS. TO OPEN THE BANK ACCOUNT, YOU WILL - AT LEAST IN AUSTRALIA - HAVE HAD TO PASS THE "100 POINT " CHECK.
THE DRAFT NATIONAL REGULATORY MODEL
THE "100 POINT" CHECK IS A FEATURE OF THE "DRAFT NATIONAL MODEL" THAT HAS BEEN PROPOSED BY AUSTRALIAN REGULATORS TO GOVERN THIS FORM OF GAMING.
I AM PLEASED TO SAY THAT THE LASSETERS SITE MEETS ALL OF THE OBJECTIVES OF THE DRAFT NATIONAL MODEL - INDEED, IN SOME AREAS SETS FAR TOUGHER REQUIREMENTS THAN SET OUT BY THE MODEL.
THE DRAFT MODEL HAS NUMBER OF PROBLEMS - NOT THE LEAST OF WHICH IS IT IS NATIONAL MODEL ATTEMPTING TO REGULATE ACTIVITY OCCURRING IN A GLOBAL WORLD.
I UNDERSTAND THAT SOME AUSTRALIAN JURISDICTIONS THAT HAVE PASSED LEGISLATION BASED ON THE MODEL MAY BE CONSIDERING AMENDMENTS TO MAKE THE REGULATORY SCHEME WORK.
THAT BEING SAID, THE NORTHERN TERRITORY AGREES WITH THE OBJECTIVE OF DEVELOPING AN AGREED NATIONAL SCHEME FOR THE REGULATION OF THIS FORM OF GAMING.
THE TERRITORY WILL BE DISCUSSING THE SCOPE FOR FURTHER REFINEMENT OF THE DRAFT MODEL, AND THE MIGRATION OF THE TERRITORY TO AN AGREED REGULATORY SCHEME WITH THE OTHER STATES IN THE NEAR FUTURE.
PENDING THESE DISCUSSIONS, AUSTRALIANS IN OTHER THAN THE SOUTHERN REGION OF THE NORTHERN TERRITORY ARE PRESENTLY NOT PERMITTED TO BE ACCEPTED AS PLAYERS WITH LASSETERS.
I UNDERSTAND THE DRAFT NATIONAL MODEL IS BEING EXAMINED BY THE PRODUCTIVITY COMMISSION IN ITS INQUIRY INTO GAMBLING.
I ALSO UNDERSTAND THAT INTERNET GAMING GENERALLY, IS A KEY FEATURE OF THIS INQUIRY.
I AWAIT WITH INTEREST THE OUTCOME OF THE INQUIRY.
THE NORTHERN TERRITORY WILL CAREFULLY CONSIDER THE PRODUCTIVITY COMMISSION'S FINDINGS, BUT THE TERRITORY IS ALSO BE MONITORING AND LEARNING FROM DEVELOPMENTS ALL OVER THE WORLD.
WORK HAS ALREADY STARTED ON THE NEXT GENERATION OF TERRITORY INTERNET GAMING LAWS.
FEDERAL LAWS
AS I HAVE MENTIONED THE NATIONAL INQUIRY BY THE PRODUCTIVITY COMMISSION, I WOULD LIKE TO TOUCH ON THE CALLS FOR FEDERAL REGULATION OF THIS AREA.
I MUST ADMIT I AM UNCERTAIN ABOUT THE BASIS FOR THESE CALLS.
ON THE ONE HAND, SOME COMMENTATORS SEEM TO BE SAYING THAT BECAUSE THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT HAS THE CONSTITUTIONAL POWER TO REGULATE THIS AREA, IT SHOULD DO SO.
I AM UNPERSUADED BY THIS ARGUMENT.
THIS IS LIKE SAYING THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT SHOULD REGULATE ALL FAST-FOOD OUTLETS BECAUSE A TELEPHONE CAN BE USED TO ORDER PIZZA.
IF THIS TYPE OF ARGUMENT IS FOLLOWED THROUGH TO ITS LOGICAL CONCLUSION, ALL AREAS OF COMMERCIAL ACTIVITY WILL BE REGULATED BY THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT AS E-COMMERCE GROWS AND AFFECTS ALL AREAS OF COMMERCIAL ACTIVITY.
ANOTHER REASON THAT IS SOMETIMES CITED FOR FEDERAL LAW IS THAT WE NEED A SINGLE COMMON LAW.
WHY?
THE HISTORY OF AUSTRALIAN GAMBLING REGULATION SHOWS THAT THE STATES LEARN FROM EACH OTHER.
EACH NEW LAW BUILDS ON THE DEVELOPMENTS INTERSTATE, BUT ADAPTS THEM TO THEIR OWN LOCAL CIRCUMSTANCES.
IN SHORT, ON WHAT I HAVE SEEN SO FAR, I AM UNABLE TO SEE ANY SUBSTANCE BEHIND CALLS FOR A COMMON FEDERAL LAW.
CONCLUSION
LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, THIS CONCLUDES MY REMARKS.
I AM CERTAIN THAT WE WILL SEE A DEAL OF DEBATE ON INTERNET GAMING IN THE FUTURE. I HOPE THIS IS BASED ON REALITIES RATHER THAN PERCEPTIONS.
THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME.