Brimbank has again recorded the highest losses in the state from electronic gaming machines.
According to data released by the Victorian Commission for Gambling and Liquor Regulation last week, Brimbank recorded more than $139 million in losses from electronic gaming machines in the 2017-18 financial year, a four per cent increase on the previous year.
Casey recorded the second highest losses, nearly $8 million lower, while nearby municipalities Melton ($66 million), Maribyrnong ($54 million) and Moonee Valley ($78.5 million) lost significantly less than Brimbank.
Brimbank councillor Virginia Tachos said it was time for real change to address the impact of gambling losses in the area.
“We’ve held the unfortunate title of having the highest electronic gambling machine losses in Victoria for more than a decade now. It’s a title we want to lose,” Cr Tachos said.
“The figures released by the VCGLR show that in 2017-2018, more than $139 million was lost to pokies in Brimbank alone. That equates to $11.5 million a month, or about $380,000 a day. This can’t continue.
“We’ve long been lobbying for better regulation of the gaming industry and continue to partner with the Alliance for Gambling Reform to pursue wider systemic reform.”
Brimbank councillors took their fight for change in the sector to the steps of Parliament last week, joining mayors from across the west to call for tighter regulations to reduce future gaming losses.
Among a number of reforms, Brimbank council is calling for stricter limits on maximum bets, as well as a reduction in trading hours for gaming venues and more research into the impact of gaming at local levels.
“We want to see the introduction of $1 maximum bets to reduce the amount of money gamblers can lose each time they press a button,” Cr Tachos said.
“Currently venues are able to stay open for 20 hours each day, which means community members are able to access pokies virtually around the clock.
“There are currently 953 EGMs in Brimbank – the maximum allowable number of machines.
“We are calling for a ‘sinking cap’ on EGMs, which would mean that as EGMs are removed from one venue, they would not be replaced in another venue.”
