Australia gets gambling reform bill over the line but leaves neither side fully satisfied

Australia’s Labor government secured parliamentary approval for the widest ranging package of gambling reforms the country has seen in decades this week. Prime Minister Anthony Albanese’s government announced on 20 August that the Interactive Gambling Amendment (Gambling Reform) Bill 2026 had been approved by parliament, following a deal secured with the Liberal National Coalition opposition. “The Albanese Government is delivering the strongest ever laws to tackle gambling harm as part of a comprehensive and balanced package,” said Anika Wells, Minister of Communication in the Labor government. “These laws deliver meaningful protections for Australians experiencing gambling-related harm, including relief from the bombardment of wagering advertisements in sport and strong restrictions on predatory inducements.” The Interactive Gambling Amendment (Gambling Reform) Bill 2026 will, as its name suggests, amend the Interactive Gambling Act 2001, the main legislation governing Australia’s vast gambling industry. What is Australia doing about gambling? The contents of the Albanese government’s reform package has been known since April. The reforms are largely inspired by the 31 recommendations of the 2023 Murphy report, an inquiry into gambling regulation and the industry’s societal impact penned by the late Labor MP Peta Murphy. Of the different reforms, the most visible and widely discussed have been the ones around advertising. The 2023 Murphy report called for a complete ban on gambling advertising, which Albanese has fallen short of doing. Gambling advertising is a lucrative source of revenue for Australian sports and broadcasters, and it was rumoured that Albanese held off on introducing a reform package to parliament in late 2025 to avoid a potential showdown with national media ahead of the March 2026 elections. This same logic may have informed the government’s decision to hold back on a full ban on gambling advertising, much to the chagrin of campaigners and backbench MPs. The bill’s advertising stipulations instead read as follows: A ban on gambling advertising during live coverage of sports events on broadcast and online streaming services, starting from 15 minutes before and ending five minutes after any live sporting event between 5am-8:30pm. Banning betting advertising in sports venues and on players and officials uniforms – effectively bringing an end to sports sponsorship in Australia, something some clubs had already been distancing themselves from. Banning the use of athletes, celebrities and influencers in betting adverts. This may remind international audiences of the Netherlands 2022 role model ban, which has been emulated in other nations since. Banning betting advertising on the radio during school drop-off and pick-up times. Banning broadcasters from promoting sporting odds. Banning ads on online platforms, including social media, unless people have a logged in account, are over 18, and are given an opt out option. Banning direct inducement marketing for the first 14 days a customer creates a betting account, and for three months after someone deregisters from the BetStop self-exclusion service. Establish a wagering advertising opt-out register. The latter point, the register, was the crux of the agreement between Labour and its main opposition in the Liberal-National Coalition. The opposition also pressured Labor to include online streaming services in the 5am-8:30pm advertising ban, with the government having initially shied away from doing so. While the bulk of proposals are focused on advertising, it is not the only area the Act covers. Countering illegal gambling activity is an important area. The bill will allow banks and payment service providers (PSPs) to black transactions to illegal gambling operators. It will also give the Australian Communications and Media Authority (ACMA) more powers to block offshore illegal websites. A quick scan of the ACMA’s newsroom will show that combatting illegal gambling sites is a regular activity for the regulator. Finally, the act also bans online keno – known as ‘pocket pokies” as a spin on the colloquial term “pokie” used to refer to a physical gaming machine – and foreign-matched lotteries i.e. lotteries that allow Australians to wager on the outcome of an overseas lottery. “We are also cracking down on illegal gambling operators and other dodgy services that divert business from genuine lotteries and charities,” said Wells. “We have worked across Parliament to deliver a balanced, practical and enforceable package of gambling reforms – the most significant in Australia’s history.” Do they think it’s all over? However, for anyone thinking that Australia’s long-running debate on gambling reform is now over and done with, you really should think again. On the face of it, the reforms mentioned above are wide-ranging, but for many, they are far from it. You’ll remember that the Murphy report had 31 recommendations. The Interactive Gambling Amendment (Gambling Reform) Bill 2026 does not. For many campaigners and backbench MPs, this does not go far enough. Critics of the legislation include rebellious Labor and Liberal National MPs, a variety of independents, and pretty much the entirety of the Greens party. The latter has described the bill as “cowardly”, while the Greens’ leader, Larissa Waters, said that Labour should “hang their heads in shame”. The entire Labor party should hang their heads in shame today. In one foul deal with the Liberals, the PM has abandoned vulnerable Australians and given predatory gambling companies the freedom to overrun our sport and screens. — Larissa Waters (@larissawaters) August 18, 2026 David Pocock, independent Senator, former Australia national team rugby union player and vocal proponent of gambling reform, had earlier described the bill as a “betrayal” of the Australian public. First and foremost, on the topic of advertising, gambling reform advocates are not happy with the bill falling short of a full ban on advertising – as recommended by the Murphy report three years ago. Another key area is regulation. The ACMA is effectively the de facto national regulator of Australian gambling, but this is just one remit it carries as the wider authority for media and communications in the country. Below the ACMA, regulation is carried out on a state-by-state basis. But the Northern Territory Racing and Wagering Commission (NTRWC) is widely seen as a de facto regulator of online betting as well, and campaigners have long criticised the authority for being too close to the industry. And while the opt-out advertising clause was agreed with the Liberal-National Coalition, some coalition MPs – chiefly those in the Liberals – weren’t entirely on board. Two MPs actually crossed the floor to vote against the bill, and some like Simon Kennedy MP argued that an opt-in method for online advertising would be better. Kennedy still voted to support the bill, however, seeing it as better than nothing. “This is not perfect but it’s much improved and much better,” he said, speaking to ABC News’ Afternoon Briefing. “And in politics, unfortunately, you often don’t get things all your own way. It has to sometimes involve compromise.” And on the opposite side of the spectrum, what does the industry think? Some in the industry were surprised when Albanese announced the reform package back in April, as many reform campaigners likely were as well given how long the government dragged its feet on the Murphy report. The opt-out advertising option has caught particular industry criticism, however. Earlier this week, Responsible Wagering Australia (RWA), the trade body for regulated Australian betting, strongly criticised the amendments to Albanese’ bill. RWA’s argument will be familiar to many, being very similar to those made in the UK, the Netherlands and elsewhere – that by preventing the regulated industry from promoting itself, the government is giving an advantage to the offshore, illegal one that it is simultaneously trying to roll back. “These measures will significantly curtail our ability to advertise a legal product safely to adults” Mr Cantwell said. “This new global opt-out system, akin to BetStop, is proposed to be designed, developed and implemented in less than four months. Betstop, which is a simpler concept, took more than four years from inception to implementation”. “If you push people away from the licensed, regulated market – by banning or limiting the promotions that let local operators compete, or by making Australian odds less competitive with new taxes and levies – you don’t stop them punting. “You push them offshore, into products with no consumer protections, no support, no Betstop, and no contribution to Australian sport and racing. In fact, these sites actively undermine sports integrity and consumer protections.” The vote may be over, but the debate is far from done. Industry pushback against the reforms will continue, although maybe not all of them, as it seems stakeholders may be more accepting that the times are changing on one or two fronts. More significantly though, politicians and campaigners in favour of gambling reform are far from satisfied with Albanese’ legislation. A general sentiment is that the government has chickened out at best, and insulted Peta Murphy’s memory at worst.