Gambling In Canada: 30 Years Plus and So What? Dr. Colin S. Campbell Dept. of Criminology Douglas...

1

Gambling In Canada:30 Years Plus and So What?

Dr. Colin S. CampbellDept. of Criminology

Douglas CollegeNew Westminster, B.C.

With thanks to the research assistance of Ms. Christianne Paras

Engaging the Big Questions in Gambling StudiesApril 8-9, 2011 AGRI Conference

Banff, Alberta

Engaging the Big Questions in Gambling Studies

2

Major Trends & Issues in Canadian Gambling over the past

30 years.• given the breadth and scope of these issues, my comments and observations can only be thematic and descriptive.

• Intent to stimulate thought and debate


3

BENCHMARKS

• Symposia held in 1988 and 1993 by SFU.


4

1988 National Symposium on Lotteries & Gambling

• 1st Canadian endeavor to bring together a range of: – Scholars– Government officials (including law

enforcement)– Industry representatives– Special interest groups

Purpose: “to discuss the multi-faceted aspects of gambling.”


5

Key Participants:

• Margaret Beare,• David Dixon,• John Dombrink,• William Eadington,• Henry Lesieur,• Jan McMillen,• David Miers,• Jerome Skolnick,• William Thompson, • And a couple of teenagers – Indeed, one or two of

you may have heard of them:• Rachel Volberg & Garry J. Smith.


6

1988 Hot Topics:

• Eadington, McMillen, Lesieur, Smith

• Culled from their contributions to the conference proceedings that were published as:

“Gambling in Canada: Golden Goose or Trojan Horse?” (1989).URL: http://hdl.handle.net/1880/193

http://hdl.handle.net/1880/193




7

Quick & Dirty Overview:

Eadington (1989):1. Strong preference for constraints on

commercial casinos in Canada.2. Canadian aversion to private sector

ownership & operation of casinos - contrary to most countries

3. Government-run casinos – regulatory oversight is prone to politicization.

4. Noted Canadian casino clientele were local regulars – not tourists – thus limited economic development potential


8

Lesieur (1989):- Little study of & little known about:1. Impact of P.G. on the workplace.2. Indebtedness of P.G.s3. Gambling & Youth4. Impact of PG on families & children5. Co-occurring disorders & multiple addictions


9

6. P.G. & Crime7. SOGS (1987)8. PG Treatment Needs – only treatment available in Canada – GA & GamAnon.


10

Smith (1989):1. Nexus of amateur sport/non-profit

organizations in Alberta and Gambling.

2. Liberalization of laws & attitudes, facilitated by the “good causes” that are funded with gambling dollars.

3. Raised moral/ethical questions about the exploitative nature and regressivity of the charity ventures


11

McMillen (1989):1) Noted the 1985 payment for the amendment to the Code – to “vacate” gambling.2) Noted the elimination of an active RCMP role in policing gambling.3) Speculation about the increased power of provinces within Canadian federalism.


12

4) Prediction of shift away from welfare-oriented (charity) gambling; increase of gambling for profit.5) Prediction of increased competition for gambling revenue; gloomy outcome for charities predicted.6) Anticipated: increased concentration of ownership; decrease of home town operations; increase of transnational ownership.


13

7) Powerful operators and suppliers of technology will become politically influential.

8) Noted that no convincing evidence that expansion of casino gambling had made much of an impact on Australian tourism.

9) Commended Canada’s grass roots input to the policy process; untenable that gambling policy become the preserve of political or administrative elite.

10) Need for policy to be guided by principles; not by economic motives.

1993 2nd National Symposium

• Purpose: To examine gambling developments in the 5 years since the 1st Symposium in 1988.

• Proceedings published as:Gambling in Canada: The Bottom Line (1994)URL: http://hdl.handle.net/1880/259

Engaging the Big Questions in Gambling Studies 14



Key Participants:

• William Eadington• Sue Fisher• Elizabeth (Betty) George• Henry Lesieur• Garry J. Smith• William Thompson• Rachel Volberg

Engaging the Big Questions in Gambling Studies 15


16

1993 Symposium

• Between 1988 & 1993, significant events occurred:

1. Introduction of VLTs – in Eastern Canada – non-age restricted premises.2. Outing of PG – widely reported coverage of man attacking EGMs with a sledge hammer. 3. High stakes casino gaming appears4. Series of prevalence studies initiated


17

Hot Topics of 1993

Key Speakers:Smith, Volberg, Lesieur


18

Smith (1994):

1. Ethics of government exploiting citizens, particularly the disadvantaged2. Raised addictiveness of EGMs3. Called for principles to guide policy.


19

Smith (1994):

• Raised the question: Has expansion of gambling made Canada a better place to live?

• Major Benefit: - the effectiveness of Canadian regulatory systems:

• “There have been very few gambling related scandals, and when improprieties have surfaced, they have usually been dealt with promptly and thoroughly.” (p21)


20

Volberg (1994):

• Noted the “pre-paradigmatic stage of research on gambling-related problems” and the disagreement & debate about them.


21

Volberg (1994)

• Use of SOGS & Review of methodology of prevalence studies. Limitations & revisions to SOGS noted.

• Pointed out that between 1980-1993 some 22 surveys of PG had been conducted including: AB, BC, MB, NB, NS & PQ.


22

Lesieur (1994):

• Noted dramatic change in Canada since 1988 with respect to research.

• Increase of prevalence studies• Increased prevention programs including

Gambling Help Hotlines• Training for counsellors• Greater availability of treatment services• One half Canadian provinces had provided

assistance to PGs and their families.• Need for the other half to follow.


23

4 Broad Domains can be Identified:

I. Political-Legal-Regulatory IssuesII. Technological IssuesIII. Social-Economic IssuesIV. Academic Issues


24

I. P0LITICAL-LEGAL-REGULATORY ISSUES (6)

1. 1969 Amendment to the Criminal Code of Canada- Opened the door to provincial

lotteries and to the expansion of charitable gaming in the form of bingos and casino gaming.


25

2. 1985 Amendment to the Code- Consolidated provincial authority

over all gambling.- Gave legal permission for

provinces to operate electronic gaming formats.

- Start of a paradigm shift in Canadian gambling.


26

3. Provincial Monopolization: Executive Level Control- Gambling policy decisions typically

kept out of provincial legislatures.- Decisions the exclusive domain of a

policy-elite made up of select cabinet members and senior civil servants.

- Lion’s share of revenues accrue to provincial governments.


27

4. Absence of Genuine Public Consultation- At the federal level, last public consultation

was in the 1950’s- Changes of the magnitude of the 1985

amendment entailed no public consultation.- Provincially, a series of “stake-holder”

consultations are evident – but these are typically in camera with no verbatim transcription of proceedings.


28

5. Absence of independent policing and regulatory oversight.- Cooptation of regulatory personnel

and/or policing authorities.- Aggressive and pro-active policing

and regulation is thwarted by the revenue-imperative of provincial polices.

- Phenomenon of “regulatory capture”


29

6. Complete absence of a federal presence in Canadian gambling.- Disbanding of RCMP Gambling Specialist program in late 1980s.- Unlike, the UK, Australia, & USA, no national review of gambling and its impact in Canada.


30

II. TECHNOLOGICAL ISSUES (2)

• 1. Introduction, Expansion, Domination of Electronic Gaming Machines (EGMs):

- The most significant development- Cannibalization of revenue from traditional

gaming formats: lotteries, bingos. - Consequences for non-profit, charitable

sector – destabilization of their revenues.- Government revenue dependence.- Addictiveness for players.


31

• 2. Advent of Internet gambling• Holds the potential to supersede

the impact of land-based EGMs – the omnipresence of commercial gambling combined with privacy, anonymity, isolation.

• Still in its infancy• Near impossibility of prohibition• Alarming rates of PG


32

Internet Gambling:

- Uncertain & unchallenged legal status of the Kahnawake Mohawk Nation – in the top 3 cites for the volume of Internet gambling transactions in the world.- Holds the potential for significant

political, legal, economic conflict.


33

Internet Gambling:

• Aggressive moves by BCLC – to capture and build Internet gambling customers.

• Unilateral by-pass of municipal consultation.

• $9,999.00 weekly limit possible.• Predatory marketing.• Intended to circumvent money

laundering requirements.• Ethics of responsible gaming called into

question.


34

Internet Gambling:

• Canadian public has not totally come to terms with the wide-open availability of land-based gambling.

• Ordinary Canadians – to this point -unaware of the pervasiveness of Internet gambling.


35

III SOCIAL – ECONOMIC ISSUES (3)

1) Lack of a definitive methodology for assessing the overall impact of gambling on our community.• Williams, Rehm, Stevens (2011)

point to 492 studies over a 36 year span.


36

• Observation offered by Eadington many years ago (circa 1980s) – now clichéd:

• “Easy to quantify the benefits of gambling”


37

• Political Significance to this: Pro-gambling forces have had a public-relations advantage because of this.

• Economic benefits dazzle decision-makers.

• Easy for gambling proponents to side-step the negative consequences.


38

2) Problem Gambling- Emerges in the 1988-1993 time period

as the gambling industry’s Achilles heel.

- Fuels and is fuelled by a burgeoning “help industry” of:

- researchers, treatment specialists, psychologists, psychiatrists, clinicians, public health experts, counsellors, and government bureaucrats.


39

3) Responsible Gambling – as an industry and government response to PG.- This too has spurred the growth of a cadre

of professionals and research initiatives.- pro-gambling forces and provincial

governments combine.- “Gambling neutral”- seek to placate growing public fears while

introducing new gambling products, services, and institutions.


40

IV. ACADEMIC ISSUES (3)

1. Establishment of major research institutes in Canada:a) Alberta Gaming Research Institute

(1999)b) Ontario Problem Gambling

Research Centre (2000)


41

• c) Research centres:i) International Centre for Youth

Gambling Problems and High-Risk Behaviors, McGill University (2001)

ii) Centre québécois d'excellence pour la prévention et le traitement du jeu, Laval Université (1997)

iii) Responsible Gaming Council (2001)iv) Gambling Awareness Nova Scotia

(1998)


42

3. Series of Annual Conferencesa) AGRI – since 2002b) RGC Discovery – since 2000c) Gaming Awareness NS – since

2004


43

• 3. Establishment of 2 principal academic journals

1) Journal of Gambling Studies (est. 1985)2) International Gambling Studies (est. 2001)


44

AND SO WHAT?


45

AND SO WHAT?

• 1. Despite not inconsequential levels of funding for gambling research in Canada – what do we have to show for it?

• 2. What effect has this research had on public policy?

• 3. At the end of the day and after 30+ years, what do we know definitively?


46

MY ANSWER:

NOT MUCH!


47

My Answer: Not much!

1. SEIG – studies inconclusive or contradictory, both negative & positive outcomes overstated.• Destination casinos – hold potential to

bring in outside revenue and to create broad economic benefit.

• How many Canadian casinos, despite the political blustering, are truly destination casinos?

• Very few, I suspect.


48

• Increasing concentration of Canadian gaming suppliers.

• Increasing foreign ownership.• No debate or research regarding

how much revenue is drained from provincial economies.


49

2. P.G. – (and derivatives: awareness, prevention, treatment) principal subject of research & academic attention. • Other than damning indictments of

the addictiveness of EGMs – not much.

• In the face of compelling empirical evidence, lottery corporations, politicians, gaming operators downplay the negative impacts.


50

3. Regulation & Policing – - Persistence of conflict of interest with

government simultaneous wearing the hats of regulator & beneficiary.

- Gambling & crime nexus – not much known.

- Credible media accounts of money laundering, frauds, organized crime – yet governments in denial.


51

4. Responsible Gambling – • Allied to the individualist-orientation

typified by psychological understanding of P.G.

• Just who is responsible?• Focus on the individual.• Not on state policies.• RG – emerges with and appeals to the

rise of neo-liberalism, the minimalist state, consumer society.


52

• Focus on the individual as the primary site where responsibility lies, RG side-steps such issues as access and availability.

• Excessive gambling transposed into an individual problem and depoliticized.

• Psychologists - and a host of other very busy people - have led this charge.


53

Thank you, very much.

Gambling In Canada: 30 Years Plus and So What? Dr. Colin S. Campbell Dept. of Criminology Douglas...

Documents

Transcript of Gambling In Canada: 30 Years Plus and So What? Dr. Colin S. Campbell Dept. of Criminology Douglas...