But don't you need to alter the legislation to get a license? i was under the impression getting a license itself was prohibited, therefore for one to apply they need to change that part of legislation? Or..?

As I've mentioned countless times itt the Xenophon hatred is completely misguided. He's anti-gambling but was not the driving force behind any of this

Oh well guess it's time to move to New Zealand.
Added bonus can get the guns the Canberra bastards stole back.

https://www.newzealandnow.govt.nz/wh...land/australia

did anyone read the submissions lol?

just us it seems

Yeah it was the Minister, I forgot...he may not appear to be the driving force but he was very influential IMO about why this amendment was pursued.

It just seems to me that without there being any rational economic or social basis for the change that the make-up of the political landscape ensured that quite a quiet, unassuming change for most people would be proposed for adoption and then adopted.

I can really see knowing how politics works that some advisor to the Minister sat down and looked at a raft of recommendations about how the IG Act could be tightened up and just thought in a sort of box ticking exercise how is it ever going to be opposed and when it came to the Minister I can't believe he wouldn't be thinking down the line that this would be yet another proposal to appease Xenophon for his vote on other non-gambling matters that the government wants to pass.

I just wanted to make a couple of points on the Xenophon thing.

For obvious reasons I have never been a big fan of Xenophon, but I went to meet with him due to his strong anti-gambling stance.

Credit where it is due, Xenophon was actually a net positive for our cause. As the email from Morgan (who I also met) said he called for more debate on the issue and pointed out the hypocrisy between Australia's position on sports betting compared to online poker.

We had a very positive chat when Monster Dong and I went and met with him. He asked us to keep it confidential so we will. But the fact that we have had mainstream media coverage and some Senators push for a Senate Inquiry suggests that his assistance probably helped with this.

Also, I have had several Liberal Senators confirm with me that they had spoken to Xenophon privately who had reiterated the point to them that online poker was worthy of a separate debate.

Is Xenophon anti gambling, yes. Are we generally going to disagree with his position a lot of the time, yes. But he did give us a fair hearing and came to a far more rational position than many others who voted against us.

Really ****ing hope this is how u introduced him too.

So he voted against the amendment, did he?

I don't see him as the kind of politician that would look to openly disagree with your cause even if there are worse and more pervasive forms of gambling out there that aren't regulated or regulated to a degree that Xenophon wants (which there are such as sports betting and pokies). But to say that overall he wasn't in favour of a clamp down on online poker to the extent that it would be banned is just delusional.

He has an image to protect that he needs to be perceived as being fair to all sides now that he holds the balance of power but he also has a known agenda that he always needs to protect which is anti-gambling because it is what first got him elected and one of the main reasons why he is still there. And it is pretty clear which of these would come first even if he sounded quite convincing to you (which he ought to be given he is a politician).

On a sidenote, if what he said is taken to be true that he wanted more debate on it, why didn't he support Leyonhjelm and Bernardi's inquiry or at least wait until the report was handed down before they voted on the amendment? If anyone could convince the government to hold off on the vote it would be him and it can't be said that it wouldn't be a fair and reasonable position for anyone to take who truly wants more debate on the issue but again appearances can be a whole lot different to actual reality, especially given what I said above about his competing interests.

Xenophon DID support the inquiry.



The vote had already been held off for an insane amount of time, if the senate don't agree to the amendments from the House of Reps it can go back and forth and Turnbull could call a double dissolution. I mean he obviously wouldn't - in reality online poker is an incredibly miniscule part of the amendment that they weren't going to keep pushing it back

Then it really doesn't make sense if he didn't at least lobby the government to hold off on the vote until the report was handed down which was around 20th of September IIRC. Holding off the vote until this time wouldn't be all that delaying given the time as you say that the vote has already been held off for (also looks with the vote breakdown that apart from the Greens supporting it which they may have done it for procedural fairness to Leyonhjelm and not knowing that the government was actually not going to wait until the report was handed down before they voted on the amendment but it looks as though it breaks pretty much how it normally would break with the Coalition and the cross bench on the one side and the Labor party on the other).

You could even argue it was even more duplicitous by Xenophon (and the government) to not allow the handing down of the report given that it was hardly going to cause the government all that much grief holding off the vote to wait just over a month for this report and shows that they weren't willing to give Leyonhjelm and Bernardi a fair go in being able to prepare a report to table in Parliament and then for the Senate to consider that before the vote which seems like the ordinary course of events that should occur if they succeeded in establishing this inquiry to begin with.

It is, as if, the report itself which anyone could tell by looking at the submissions and hearing the evidence presented that it was going to further substantiate that the government were overreaching in banning online poker compared to the harm it caused and to vote on it before the report was handed down just makes it that much harder for an amendment re-introducing or legalising online poker through regulation to be introduced.

You can spin it anyway you want to.

Online gambling got banned pokie gambling didn't. They're all a bunch of hypocrites
They don't even know what county they're from ffs

Sportsbet's submission into online poker has been posted. They are supportive of legalising (which is a nice surprise).

It's the 14th September.

That vote I posted was for the enquiry, the vote on the actual act had bipartisan support. How would you propose Xenophon delay a vote that had LNP and Labor support?
Again as mentioned above it had bipartisan support and the vote was scheduled, there was literally nothing anyone outside LNP or Labor could do.

Plenty - as I said, the Coalition aren't doing this for party ideological reasons so if Xenophon said to the Minister for the vote to wait until the report is handed down there is every chance that they will listen to him and wait for that to occur (given they are dependent on Xenophon to pass other non-gambling legislation). But in saying that and as I said the chances of that actually occurring is extremely slim as Xenophon wasn't as minded as some people think he was to really debate this topic further to a point that the amendment would not pass.

Any reason why it has just been posted now?

I wouldn't be surprised if this is because the effect of this amendment means that more people will go to live venues and bet at the TAB rather than using their Sportsbet app.

But this is entirely speculation on your part, especially when we have much more evidence that the Coalition, who introduced the bill, and Labor, who voted against an enquiry into poker, have been far more harmful

hey there's a lot of crazy **** going on in parliament right now. does this help our cause in anyway to delay the bill?

Xenophon effectively gave us 6 months extra of poker. If it wasn't for his amendment regarding credit/advertising etc, we would have been done in March.

Does anyone know much about this asian poker site, ultrabet? Taking aussie players? Traffic any good? etc

Come on guys, forget the dodgy chinese poker sites. Get out to your nearest casino.

heard mumbles about this. also curious.

We should look into the MP's that didn't support our cause and check if they are really born in OZ, 5 in 1 Month have been found out to have dual citizenship from different Country's.

We may be able to remove a few of the 1's that didn't support our cause and have a better chance.

Here's ultrabets response - lol
"Thanks for contacting Ultrabet Support. It's a pleasure to assist you.

I'm regret to inform that due to the many different gaming laws regarding online poker and risks involved with political instability and terror threats, we cannot currently accept players who reside Australia.

Please accept our apologies for any inconvenience caused.

Should you have any question, don't hesitate to contact ourselves.

Regards,
"

Terrorists winning again.

lol them damn terror threats