The Victorian Gambling and Casino Control Commission (VGCCC) advised regional venues this week to be extra vigilant over the upcoming holiday period in preventing self-excluded patrons from entering a gaming machine area.
Gambling providers have a duty of care for their customers’ wellbeing, and while some venues experience an increase in patronage over the holidays, self-excluded patrons may be difficult to detect or less known to a venue’s staff.
In Victoria, it is a condition of licensing that venues have a gambling self-exclusion program, which is currently conducted by Australian Hotels Association (AHA) and Clubs Victoria (CV) on behalf of all venue operators.
Venues may conduct their own program or have another provider conduct a program, so long as it complies with the Ministerial Direction issued for requirements and standards.
Self-exclusion is one of many tools that a person may use to help prevent gambling harm to themselves and those close to them.
Self-exclusion programs require venues to take reasonable steps to prevent self-excluded individuals from entering the gaming machine area; to maintain procedures for detecting excluded persons and reducing the risk of their entry; and to have clear processes outlining the actions staff must take (including any interventions) when a self-excluded person is identified in the gaming machine area.
Last month, Crown Melbourne was found by the VGCCC to have allowed a self-excluded person access to gambling for almost fifteen hours and was fined $100,000 for the breach.
The incident showed the need for self-exclusion safeguards, said VGCCC CEO Suzy Neilan.
“Exclusion is a critical harm minimisation tool. It enables a clear barrier between an individual and the gambling environment especially during moments of vulnerability.”
The incident occurred on 31 October 2024, when the excluded person, who had made efforts to hide their identity, entered and proceeded to gamble continuously for fourteen hours and forty minutes.
Neither a Crown PlaySafe attendant nor any other Crown staff member approached the person during this time.
The incident showed that Crown’s implemented measures had not been sufficient to mitigate the shortcomings in its systems and controls, according to Neilan.
“For nearly 15 hours, the person was able to gamble continuously without taking a break, interacting with staff, or being identified by Crown’s surveillance systems,” Neilan said.
“Crown staff only became aware of the breach after being alerted by a VGCCC inspector.”
Crown worked with the VGCCC during the investigation and has since implemented further controls including additional staff training, reviewing the location of facial recognition cameras, and reconfiguring the entrances to the gaming floor.
Neilan said this incident showed both the challenges in exclusion enforcement and the importance of vigilance and continuous improvement.
The VGCCC’s position on gambling harm can be found here.
