Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ)
A former NRL player yesterday alleged shocking inducements from betting companies to keep gambling, including receiving cocaine as well as free alcohol and food at race meetings.
Luke Bateman’s testimony came on the first day of a two-day Senate inquiry into new online gambling laws, which began yesterday.
It is examining two bills the federal government has introduced to restrict online wagering in Australia.
The betting companies denied any wrongdoing, but the allegations put the issue of betting inducements into the spotlight.
Critics take aim
There are many critics of the changes Prime Minister Anthony Albanese announced in April.
Most of the concerns raised by critics relate to the lack of a total ban on media advertising and marketing for wagering providers, which was recommended by the 2023 report of the Murphy inquiry into online wagering.
This report also recommended a host of other reforms including the abolition of inducements to gamble. This has not been proposed by the government’s bills.
Inducements were defined by the Murphy inquiry as: “advertising and direct messaging [including] offers such as deposit matches, multi-bets, bonus bets, rewards programs and early cash-outs”.
Witnesses told the Murphy committee they has been offered millions of dollars in “free betting money” and that inducements had rekindled gambling habits they had sought to escape.
Even after self-excluding from gambling operators, witnesses reported receiving inducements from other operators, or from “affiliates” who received a trailing commission for referring punters to an operator.
Amendments to the National Consumer Protection Framework for online gambling have prohibited inducements from being offered to encourage people to open an online wagering account.
But evidence to the Murphy inquiry suggested these could be easily bypassed.
Evidence to the Senate inquiry included damning allegations from Bateman, who told the committee the inducements he received included cocaine provided by the wagering companies, as well as interstate trips featuring free alcohol and food at race meetings. He was also offered bonus bets.
He said:
There were times where I would be flown interstate and taken to race days, put in marquees with alcohol and food provided all day, things like that. Before getting there, the VIP manager would offer ‘hey mate, what drugs do you want? Do you want a couple of bags for this weekend? We’ll organise that for you’.
Prominent gambling reform advocate Tim Costello, also giving evidence, told Senators TAB and SportsBet had provided accommodation, escorts and drugs to a high roller who is currently detained at Silverwater Prison in Sydney, facing charges. Costello said:
They were flying him to grand finals. They were offering him escorts, drugs, whatever he wanted. He was doing turnover of more than $20 million a month.
It’s unclear whether police or gambling regulators will investigate these allegations.
Why inducements are so dangerous
Australian research indicates such direct messaging is a powerful marketing tool that can “encourage a nearly immediate, and arguably impulsive, betting response, which may increase gambling-related problems.”
A more recent Australian study found “exposure to wagering direct messages, and the inducements they promote, directly increases betting, betting expenditure and betting-related harm.”
And a 2025 European study reported:
Inducements increased the amount spent on bets by over 10% and almost halved the number of people opting not to bet. Those with evidence of problem gambling were disproportionately affected. Inducements also led to decision errors, making bettors three times more likely to choose bad bets.
Given this evidence – and the evidence of those with personal experience – it’s hard to understand why inducements should not be prohibited, as the Murphy inquiry’s recommendation 16 urged:
The Committee recommends the Australian government prohibit all online gambling inducements and inducement advertising, and that it do so without delay.
Is the government doing enough?
All in all, it’s hard to mount a convincing case for inducements to continue. Nonetheless, Communications Minister Anika Wells tried to argue the national self-exclusion register, Betstop, offered a way for people to avoid inducments:
I would say to people who are either suffering from gambling harm or […] who have been advocating in the space of inducements, to assist the cause by making sure that people who might benefit from BetStop are aware of BetStop
Yet evidence demonstrates wagering affiliates continue to contact people who want to stop gambling: multiple companies have breached Betstop, including Entain, which breached it about 500 times (and was not penalised for doing so).
The Australian Communications and Media Authority also reported other breaches, noting that “breaches of the […] rules can lead to significant harm.”
As with almost all other recommendations of the Murphy Inquiry’s report, the federal government has taken no action on banning inducements.
The government has also never explained why it has failed to take action, beyond assurances it has “got the balance right”.
Like many of the decisions the government has apparently made about gambling, the reason they are ignoring inducements seems remarkably unclear.
This is an issue that affects millions of Australians every year. The Australian National University Centre for Gambling Research estimated nearly 20% of Australian adults gambled at risky levels in 2025. Another 6% were affected by someone else’s gambling.
They deserve some clarity – and more effective regulation of wagering operators.
Charles Livingstone has received funding from the Victorian Responsible Gambling Foundation, the (former) Victorian Gambling Research Panel, and the South Australian Independent Gambling Authority, the Australian and New Zealand School of Government and the Foundation for Alcohol Research and Education. He has also received funding from non-government organisations for research about poker machine gambling. He has received travel and co-operation grants from the Alberta Problem Gambling Research Institute, the Finnish Institute for Public Health, the Finnish Alcohol Research Foundation, the Ontario Problem Gambling Research Committee, the Turkish Green Crescent Society, the Problem Gambling Foundation of New Zealand, Monash University and the Public Health Advocacy Centre of Northeastern University Law School. He is a member of the Lancet Public Health Commission into gambling and the World Health Organisation expert group on gambling and gambling harm.
Original source: https://analysis1.mil-osi.com/2026/08/04/what-drugs-do-you-want-senate-inquiry-allegations-reveal-the-murky-dangers-of-betting-inducements/