❓ The WA government strongly opposes betting exchanges due to integrity concerns and potential harm to the racing industry, citing the industry's current success and aligning with initial opposition views. The Minister criticises the opposition's softening stance, warning of negative impacts on sports funding.
AnsweredQoN 605Legislative Assembly
QuestionView source ↗
BETTING EXCHANGES
Will the minister explain the government’s position on the prospect of betting exchanges operating in Western Australia and whether there are any other views on this important subject? Mr M. McGOWAN
Will the minister explain the government’s position on the prospect of betting exchanges operating in Western Australia and whether there are any other views on this important subject? Mr M. McGOWAN
AnswerView source ↗
Members will be aware that the Western Australian government has taken a strong stance in opposition to betting exchanges because it is very concerned about the threat that betting exchanges pose to the integrity of the wagering system in this state. The government has done this on the basis of very strong representations made to the government by the racing industry, which sees betting exchanges as a major threat to the continued success of the racing industry. The industry in Western Australia is doing better than that in any other state in Australia and better than at any point in living memory in Western Australia. We have taken a very strong stance on principle. We do not support betting exchanges and we see them as a major threat. Only one group had a stronger opposition than the government did on this issue, and I will quote from the statement released by that group. It states - “The nature of the business Betfair operates is against all the principles of wagering in Western Australia, . . . . . . it leaves the industry wide open to corruption. “And with Betfair an internet-operated business, with clients all around the world, racing stewards in Australia would face an enormous task to properly scrutinise all transactions, even if Betfair provided its betting sheets.” The opposition released that media statement in November 2005. However, we can see in today’s paper that the opposition is going soft on the issue. It is now saying that it has reservations about the government’s stance on the issue. It has based its reservations partly on some of the enforceability provisions of the bill. It has also said that maybe we should allow for sports betting. I remind members of the house that every cent that is made by the state through sports betting goes into what is called the sports betting account, and all that money is given to surf lifesaving, hockey, surfing and disabled surfing groups, the Deaf Society of WA to send people to the Deaflympics, and many other sporting groups in the Western Australian community. I warn the opposition that if it goes soft on this bill, it will hurt those small sporting groups in the state; they are not multibillion-dollar enterprises. The government will ensure that the opposition’s softness on this issue is made very plain to those groups. The opposition said initially that it was a threat to integrity. It is about time it stood for something and did not go soft. It should stand for something and deliver integrity for the industry in Western Australia.
Mr M. McGOWAN replied: Members will be aware that the Western Australian government has taken a strong stance in opposition to betting exchanges because it is very concerned about the threat that betting exchanges pose to the integrity of the wagering system in this state. The government has done this on the basis of very strong representations made to the government by the racing industry, which sees betting exchanges as a major threat to the continued success of the racing industry. The industry in Western Australia is doing better than that in any other state in Australia and better than at any point in living memory in Western Australia. We have taken a very strong stance on principle. We do not support betting exchanges and we see them as a major threat. Only one group had a stronger opposition than the government did on this issue, and I will quote from the statement released by that group. It states - “The nature of the business Betfair operates is against all the principles of wagering in Western Australia, . . . . . . it leaves the industry wide open to corruption. “And with Betfair an internet-operated business, with clients all around the world, racing stewards in Australia would face an enormous task to properly scrutinise all transactions, even if Betfair provided its betting sheets.” The opposition released that media statement in November 2005. However, we can see in today’s paper that the opposition is going soft on the issue. It is now saying that it has reservations about the government’s stance on the issue. It has based its reservations partly on some of the enforceability provisions of the bill. It has also said that maybe we should allow for sports betting. I remind members of the house that every cent that is made by the state through sports betting goes into what is called the sports betting account, and all that money is given to surf lifesaving, hockey, surfing and disabled surfing groups, the Deaf Society of WA to send people to the Deaflympics, and many other sporting groups in the Western Australian community. I warn the opposition that if it goes soft on this bill, it will hurt those small sporting groups in the state; they are not multibillion-dollar enterprises. The government will ensure that the opposition’s softness on this issue is made very plain to those groups. The opposition said initially that it was a threat to integrity. It is about time it stood for something and did not go soft. It should stand for something and deliver integrity for the industry in Western Australia.
Members will be aware that the Western Australian government has taken a strong stance in opposition to betting exchanges because it is very concerned about the threat that betting exchanges pose to the integrity of the wagering system in this state. The government has done this on the basis of very strong representations made to the government by the racing industry, which sees betting exchanges as a major threat to the continued success of the racing industry. The industry in Western Australia is doing better than that in any other state in Australia and better than at any point in living memory in Western Australia. We have taken a very strong stance on principle. We do not support betting exchanges and we see them as a major threat. Only one group had a stronger opposition than the government did on this issue, and I will quote from the statement released by that group. It states - “The nature of the business Betfair operates is against all the principles of wagering in Western Australia, . . . . . . it leaves the industry wide open to corruption. “And with Betfair an internet-operated business, with clients all around the world, racing stewards in Australia would face an enormous task to properly scrutinise all transactions, even if Betfair provided its betting sheets.” The opposition released that media statement in November 2005. However, we can see in today’s paper that the opposition is going soft on the issue. It is now saying that it has reservations about the government’s stance on the issue. It has based its reservations partly on some of the enforceability provisions of the bill. It has also said that maybe we should allow for sports betting. I remind members of the house that every cent that is made by the state through sports betting goes into what is called the sports betting account, and all that money is given to surf lifesaving, hockey, surfing and disabled surfing groups, the Deaf Society of WA to send people to the Deaflympics, and many other sporting groups in the Western Australian community. I warn the opposition that if it goes soft on this bill, it will hurt those small sporting groups in the state; they are not multibillion-dollar enterprises. The government will ensure that the opposition’s softness on this issue is made very plain to those groups. The opposition said initially that it was a threat to integrity. It is about time it stood for something and did not go soft. It should stand for something and deliver integrity for the industry in Western Australia.
Only one group had a stronger opposition than the government did on this issue, and I will quote from the statement released by that group. It states - “The nature of the business Betfair operates is against all the principles of wagering in Western Australia, . . . . . . it leaves the industry wide open to corruption. “And with Betfair an internet-operated business, with clients all around the world, racing stewards in Australia would face an enormous task to properly scrutinise all transactions, even if Betfair provided its betting sheets.” The opposition released that media statement in November 2005. However, we can see in today’s paper that the opposition is going soft on the issue. It is now saying that it has reservations about the government’s stance on the issue. It has based its reservations partly on some of the enforceability provisions of the bill. It has also said that maybe we should allow for sports betting. I remind members of the house that every cent that is made by the state through sports betting goes into what is called the sports betting account, and all that money is given to surf lifesaving, hockey, surfing and disabled surfing groups, the Deaf Society of WA to send people to the Deaflympics, and many other sporting groups in the Western Australian community. I warn the opposition that if it goes soft on this bill, it will hurt those small sporting groups in the state; they are not multibillion-dollar enterprises. The government will ensure that the opposition’s softness on this issue is made very plain to those groups. The opposition said initially that it was a threat to integrity. It is about time it stood for something and did not go soft. It should stand for something and deliver integrity for the industry in Western Australia.
. . . it leaves the industry wide open to corruption. “And with Betfair an internet-operated business, with clients all around the world, racing stewards in Australia would face an enormous task to properly scrutinise all transactions, even if Betfair provided its betting sheets.”
“And with Betfair an internet-operated business, with clients all around the world, racing stewards in Australia would face an enormous task to properly scrutinise all transactions, even if Betfair provided its betting sheets.”
Mr M. McGOWAN replied: Members will be aware that the Western Australian government has taken a strong stance in opposition to betting exchanges because it is very concerned about the threat that betting exchanges pose to the integrity of the wagering system in this state. The government has done this on the basis of very strong representations made to the government by the racing industry, which sees betting exchanges as a major threat to the continued success of the racing industry. The industry in Western Australia is doing better than that in any other state in Australia and better than at any point in living memory in Western Australia. We have taken a very strong stance on principle. We do not support betting exchanges and we see them as a major threat. Only one group had a stronger opposition than the government did on this issue, and I will quote from the statement released by that group. It states - “The nature of the business Betfair operates is against all the principles of wagering in Western Australia, . . . . . . it leaves the industry wide open to corruption. “And with Betfair an internet-operated business, with clients all around the world, racing stewards in Australia would face an enormous task to properly scrutinise all transactions, even if Betfair provided its betting sheets.” The opposition released that media statement in November 2005. However, we can see in today’s paper that the opposition is going soft on the issue. It is now saying that it has reservations about the government’s stance on the issue. It has based its reservations partly on some of the enforceability provisions of the bill. It has also said that maybe we should allow for sports betting. I remind members of the house that every cent that is made by the state through sports betting goes into what is called the sports betting account, and all that money is given to surf lifesaving, hockey, surfing and disabled surfing groups, the Deaf Society of WA to send people to the Deaflympics, and many other sporting groups in the Western Australian community. I warn the opposition that if it goes soft on this bill, it will hurt those small sporting groups in the state; they are not multibillion-dollar enterprises. The government will ensure that the opposition’s softness on this issue is made very plain to those groups. The opposition said initially that it was a threat to integrity. It is about time it stood for something and did not go soft. It should stand for something and deliver integrity for the industry in Western Australia.
Members will be aware that the Western Australian government has taken a strong stance in opposition to betting exchanges because it is very concerned about the threat that betting exchanges pose to the integrity of the wagering system in this state. The government has done this on the basis of very strong representations made to the government by the racing industry, which sees betting exchanges as a major threat to the continued success of the racing industry. The industry in Western Australia is doing better than that in any other state in Australia and better than at any point in living memory in Western Australia. We have taken a very strong stance on principle. We do not support betting exchanges and we see them as a major threat. Only one group had a stronger opposition than the government did on this issue, and I will quote from the statement released by that group. It states - “The nature of the business Betfair operates is against all the principles of wagering in Western Australia, . . . . . . it leaves the industry wide open to corruption. “And with Betfair an internet-operated business, with clients all around the world, racing stewards in Australia would face an enormous task to properly scrutinise all transactions, even if Betfair provided its betting sheets.” The opposition released that media statement in November 2005. However, we can see in today’s paper that the opposition is going soft on the issue. It is now saying that it has reservations about the government’s stance on the issue. It has based its reservations partly on some of the enforceability provisions of the bill. It has also said that maybe we should allow for sports betting. I remind members of the house that every cent that is made by the state through sports betting goes into what is called the sports betting account, and all that money is given to surf lifesaving, hockey, surfing and disabled surfing groups, the Deaf Society of WA to send people to the Deaflympics, and many other sporting groups in the Western Australian community. I warn the opposition that if it goes soft on this bill, it will hurt those small sporting groups in the state; they are not multibillion-dollar enterprises. The government will ensure that the opposition’s softness on this issue is made very plain to those groups. The opposition said initially that it was a threat to integrity. It is about time it stood for something and did not go soft. It should stand for something and deliver integrity for the industry in Western Australia.
Only one group had a stronger opposition than the government did on this issue, and I will quote from the statement released by that group. It states - “The nature of the business Betfair operates is against all the principles of wagering in Western Australia, . . . . . . it leaves the industry wide open to corruption. “And with Betfair an internet-operated business, with clients all around the world, racing stewards in Australia would face an enormous task to properly scrutinise all transactions, even if Betfair provided its betting sheets.” The opposition released that media statement in November 2005. However, we can see in today’s paper that the opposition is going soft on the issue. It is now saying that it has reservations about the government’s stance on the issue. It has based its reservations partly on some of the enforceability provisions of the bill. It has also said that maybe we should allow for sports betting. I remind members of the house that every cent that is made by the state through sports betting goes into what is called the sports betting account, and all that money is given to surf lifesaving, hockey, surfing and disabled surfing groups, the Deaf Society of WA to send people to the Deaflympics, and many other sporting groups in the Western Australian community. I warn the opposition that if it goes soft on this bill, it will hurt those small sporting groups in the state; they are not multibillion-dollar enterprises. The government will ensure that the opposition’s softness on this issue is made very plain to those groups. The opposition said initially that it was a threat to integrity. It is about time it stood for something and did not go soft. It should stand for something and deliver integrity for the industry in Western Australia.
. . . it leaves the industry wide open to corruption. “And with Betfair an internet-operated business, with clients all around the world, racing stewards in Australia would face an enormous task to properly scrutinise all transactions, even if Betfair provided its betting sheets.”
“And with Betfair an internet-operated business, with clients all around the world, racing stewards in Australia would face an enormous task to properly scrutinise all transactions, even if Betfair provided its betting sheets.”
Explore WA Government Data
Search the full archive in the free dashboard, or query programmatically via API.
Explore more
Government Gazette
Appointments, regulatory notices, planning changes.
Hansard
Debates, questions, speeches and sentiment.
Tabled Papers
Reports and documents tabled in Parliament.
Committees
Committee profiles and recent reports.
Regulations
Subsidiary legislation with filters and summaries.
Bills
Proposed laws and parliamentary progress.
Acts
Current WA legislation and summaries.
Explanatory Memoranda
Bills with EMs (text/PDF) available.
Members
MP profiles, party breakdown and rankings.
Pollie Rankings
Data-driven rankings across 19 categories.
Amendment Chains
Track how schemes and regulations evolve over time.