Well I am off first and that is a major part of my submission so I will certainly be emphasising that.

The fact of the matter is quite simple they are different. It is not a problem to say that to consider them the same is a completely incorrect statement.

Their is a quote from Dr Gainsbury in my submission which states that in her opinion we cannot look at all gambling activities homogeneously. We need to make that point clear.

I think the two key points to highlight in this area are

1) Peer to Peer vs House - Focus on the way the operator is remunerated here is important. The fact that they have no vested interest in the outcome leads them to favour fair games

2) The inverse relationship of luck and time/trials - It is a game of skill and luck but the importance of luck is based solely on the amount of time that the game is considered. Sure if you look at poker as one hand then there is loads of luck. The longer the trial the less luck plays a factor.

Good luck mate. It's been an awesome job driving the fightback to this point.

Good point

@Joey my twitter rant at Clubs was obv my own personal views and not reflecting the AOPA or poker community in any way. I personally do think that their organisation is scum regardless of their stance on online poker (i've worked in a sports club, we're trained to get people gambling at the pokies not stop them from problem gambling), but I obviously won't bring that up at the hearing etc. and have no plans to attack any other organsation beyond stating that their inaccurate claims are inaccurate if asked etc.

My time will basically just be recapping my submission and answering any questions they have.

Hopefully the Liberal Party's good friend "Jobson Growth' is on our side. I have a feeling he is.

We also have civil liberties, potential government tax revenue and free markets on our side and the fact that prohibition simply doesn't work and both the studies and obvious data point in other countries shows that, plus licensing leads to consumer protections to protect problem gamblers etc.

Let's hope it's a good day. Is there anywhere to stream the committee hearings for the portion of time that i'm not the one speaking with them, does anyone know?

Great work Joey and everyone else who got us to this point, let's hope we win this one.

I'm also glad Joey is up first as the AOPA can hopefully set the tone for the day as well as undermine the negative submissions by calling out their factual inaccuracies before they have time to present and it's also good Dr Gainsbury is near the end as if we don't know the data off hand for any of their questions we can direct them to ask her for the exact data later in the day. She seems to conclude that more study is needed in a lot of areas which can only be good for us as well if the committee is on board with that.

Agreed, thanks Swoop.

Has been a great effort by the whole community. We obviously want to win (and I think we have a legitimate right to be confident) but either way I think everyone ITT and in the community as a whole should be really proud of the work we have all done.

The past six months of this has literally been the most beautiful example of democracy in action that you could think of. Has been a pleasure to be a part of it.

Good luck Swoop and Joey! Its been an amazing effort from you both and you deserve much praise regardless of the outcome. Aside from the help to the cause all the submissions has given I've also had a great time reading about everyone's individual experiences, so thanks to everyone that took the time to write one.

Just wanted to pop in and thank those who have pot in time and effort.

I used to grind a lot but haven't been playing the last couple of years so don't have my finger on the pulse at all. When I did find this thread and learned of the situation I did send a strongly worded email.

Just having a glance again now and it looks like there has been a coordinated effort. So thank you those involved!!

Hi Guys. Any idea on the probability I will still be able to play online in 6 months? When are we going to find out?

I'm finding it hard to estimate the probability as I don't know the political system here but my sense is it's >50%. Joey's better placed to have a guess here.

We should find out following the completion of the enquiry which direction we're headed.

ok thanks

Nothing to be too concerned about. Aussie governments is just looking out for us. If they do ban it they have plenty of pokies available designed to control the urges of those prone to being a gambling addict.

To everyone asking we'll probably have a better idea after the hearings tomorrow or at least a general feel for whether the regulate or ban path seems more popular

TR obviously please Swoop

Good luck everyone, really hope all goes well. Thanks

Good luck at the hearings tomorrow guys.

Apparently we can watch the hearings here

http://www.aph.gov.au/Watch_Read_Listen

http://www.aph.gov.au/News_and_Events/LiveMediaPlayer?vID={184F94F7-3D5C-466B-90D5-60B2A47E2E18}

Going to wake up to watch Joey's testimony I guess i'd better watch the whole thing so that I know how things have gone etc. when i'm up.

Glhf to everyone tomorrow (myself included obv)

Here's my opening statement for tomorrow in case anyone misses the coverage tomorrow or wants a preview

Hi, my name is Oliver Gill Gaber.

I'm appearing today to discuss my submission with regards to the participation of Australians in online poker. I have been a regular online poker player over the past ten years playing several sessions of online poker per week on average. I also have over two years experience working in the poker industry, both in licensed venues and for an online poker company. I believe I can be of great help to committee members today in answering any questions that any of you may have regarding my submission.

To summarise my position, I believe that the online poker industry in Australia should be clearly licensed and regulated so that both Australian and international companies with a good reputation can attain licenses to offer online poker games legally in Australia. The game of poker is entirely legal to play for money in casinos and licensed venues such as sports clubs in Australia and in 2017 there is no reason why it should be illegal for consenting adults to play a social card game of skill on the internet with their hard earned money as a hobby should they choose to do so. The IGA was originally written in 2001 when online poker did not exist as it does today and Australian law needs to be updated to keep pace with technology and properly regulate the online poker industry.

I believe that the companies that seek licenses to offer online poker in Australia should be properly governed by a regulatory body so that Australian online poker players are provided with real consumer protections. I have gone into more detail in my submission but age verification, self-exclusion options and optional pre-set deposit limits should certainly be mandatory as well as independent auditing of the RNG determining the shuffle in online poker games to ensure that the game is fair for all players. Additionally, online poker operators must segregate all deposited player funds from their company's operational funds for the safety of consumers. Online poker operators should also pay tax to the Australian government on their profits generated through their economic activity in Australia and opening up this industry to reputable Australian and international companies will generate millions of dollars in ongoing tax revenue for the government as well as Australian jobs and economic growth. It will also prevent unregulated black market operators that pay no tax and offer no consumer protections from gaining any market share in Australia.

Prohibition has been tried in other countries with disastrous results including the creation of black markets with millions of dollars being stolen from players by illegal online poker operators with no recourse for players who have been cheated and stolen from. I do not believe it is in any party's best interests to subject Australian online poker players to this reality. I believe Dr. Gainsbury is testifying later today and her study clearly shows that the majority of online poker players plan to continue to play online poker regardless of whether it is legal or banned in Australia and it is trivially easy to access black market online poker sites from jurisdictions where online poker is illegal. Even if geo-blocking was implemented it can easily be circumvented by using a VPN. Quite simply, prohibition has been tried in other countries and it doesn't work. Regulation is a vastly superior approach. All of the reputable studies that I am aware of agree with this conclusion including Dr Gainsbury's study and a similar study conducted by the Australian Productivity Commission in 2010.

In the United Kingdom the Gambling (Licensing and Advertising Act) of 2014 has proven to be highly effective in regulating the industry. Problem gambling has not increased, British online poker players enjoy the safest and most well regulated online poker games anywhere in the world and the British government has benefited through generating substantial tax revenue. The legislation has proven to be popular with British online poker players, the companies that provide online poker in the UK and the British government alike and all parties agree that the legislation has been a great success. We should pass similar legislation in Australia.

....then I assume they ask me questions.

Hmm, 9am is midnight here in the UK. I guess I'll get to watch Swoop but I doubt I'll last for most of the rest :-)

Reminder - watch here:
http://www.aph.gov.au/Watch_Read_Listen

Anyone getting anything off that website? It shows an audio stream available but can't hear a thing.

GL to those speaking today.

snap and I so wanted to see Swoop....

Nevermind it's underway now, started a few minutes late

Salvation Army are presenting first so the schedule seems to be incorrect

Listening now. Salvation Army are just worried about the ones that can't control their gambling habits.

They did ask them "Do you know much about poker". Answer "A little bit".

Are you familiar with tournament structure?. A "Yes".

Can you supplement your income with tournament poker? A "I suppose people would try."

Salvation Army just stated "Most people that gamble are doing so on credit".

It's hard to tell who is speaking because it's an audio only stream but it sounds like we have some allies on the committee. Calling Salvation Army out on some BS in their submission

Sounds like the senate is in favour of poker on the questions asked thus far. Not sure how the senate usually operates but may just be playing Anti/Pro depending on the position of the person they are speaking with.

Senate stated that online gambling in Australia has actually decreased comparing 1999 to 2011. The only form of gambling online in Australia that has increased is sports betting which has doubled.

Just tuned in I assume this is the Salvos woman talking?

Has Joey/AOPA been up yet?

The junior female SA person is much better informed than her boss.

Who is questioning the SA? - he seems to have read the research, I'm actually impressed. Obviously he is on our side.