Solution-Focused Debate Needed But Are We Ready

Thanks to Bill Clark, for bringing to my attention this article from the Halifax Herald, Solution-focused debate needed on problem gambling

The article by Robert C. Shaw, a former vice-president of Casino Nova Scotia and a current member of the Nova Scotia Gaming Foundation, discusses the recent Internation Conference on Problem Gambling held in Nova Scotia, Canada. (Attended by the Manager of Gambler's Help Southern, who presented at the conference.)

Shaw, discusses his views on the conference and that it will be along time before the various sides of the problem gambling debate will be able to effectively discuss potential solutions and responses to problem gambling due to the views, beliefs and interests of those from various positions.

The article discusses the fact that 'social-justice' advocates have extreme views of the industry and equally extreme solutions. It should however be noted that they do not believe their views are extreme. It should be also noted that while in principle, operators have a vested interest in reducing harm, and influencing public opinion of the industry, history shows that their main interest has been protecting and increasing revenues regardless of the cost to the community.

There is 'tension' between the opposing philosophies, but there are still solutions. These solutions can be win-win but may initially appear to both sides that they have to give up something. Operators need to acknowledge that egms can and do cause harm and that their practices are contributing to this. They also need to acknowledge that they are not doing enough. Gambling opponents need to acknowledge that the gambling industry is a legitimate industry and that it is a form of entertainment that people enjoy. They also need to acknowledge that while poker machines do cause harm, it is not to everyone and it is not intentionally designed to make problem gamblers - it is designed to make money and any harm that occurs is an unfortunate, but potentially preventable, side effect.

The middle players - 'moderates' - do need to do more and make their voice heard. Gambling has a place in society, despite the fact that there will always be some potential and actual harm, that occurs. Gambling also does have benefits in a range of areas. However the gaming industry does not and has not done enough about problem gambling and needs to do so. The 'moderates' do however have to really be moderates and divulge their true positions and backgrounds - transparency is paramount in ensuring real debate can occur.

Regulators need to take and actual and genuine interest in this issue as they are supposed to be acting on the community's behalf. Regulators are supposed to act independently of government, so they are in a critical position in the debate.

In order to move to a solution-focussed debate, we need to have the debate and involve the best and most productive voices not the loudest. Only then will we get to a point where some real action can occur to protect the community while ensuring they retain the (informed) choice to gamble if they choose.

What do you think?

GG