Former and current politicians have questioned the secrecy surrounding a whopping fine handed down to a Canberra club after its staff allegedly failed to intervene in the case of a problem gambler.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
$0/
(min cost $0)
or signup to continue reading
The Raiders Club fronted the ACT Civil and Administration Tribunal on Monday to contest a $120,000 fine for breaching the ACT's poker machine laws.
The fine is the largest the commission has ever handed down and came after nearly a year-long investigation sparked by a complaint from problem gambler Laurie Brown, who fed more than $200,000 through gaming machines at Raiders clubs in Canberra.
The ACT Gambling and Racing Commission and the Raiders Club opted for mediation on February 13, but will return to the tribunal if that fails on March 5.
However the club's application to the tribunal will remain a secret, after presidential member Mary-Therese Daniel ordered it be suppressed from members of the public.
Ms Daniel explained the application was quite lengthy and may make public some details the club would prefer to remain private.
Professor Brown said she was "surprised" at the order.
"The only information we have is what the club has ben saying in the media and even though all the information we provided to commission made available to club, we have no idea what the is club arguing, or the veracity of the information," Professor Brown said.
"The local community is following this and I think they'd like to know how the club plans to defend itself because there's clear breaches of their code of conduct by not acting on me being a problem gambler. There's lots of other people in this position and families being hurt and the Canberra community would like to know what being done about this."
Tasmanian anti-poker machine Independent MP Andrew Wilkie said "given the devastation caused by addictive and potentially deadly poker machines, there is a clear public interest in this hearing".
Mr Wilkie had previously called on the club to pay back the money Professor Brown had lost.
"The public has a right to know the reason why the initial fine was given to the Raiders Club, and the grounds on which the Raiders Club is appealing that fine," Mr Wilkie said.
"It's extraordinary that a hearing like this would be allowed to take place behind closed doors."
Former ACT Attorney-General and lawyer acting for Professor Brown, Bernie Collaery said he understood neither party requested the suppression order until the suggestion was made by the presidential member.
"I find it somewhat unusual that the suggestion should come from the tribunal. If there's one matter that is undeniably in the public interest it is the issue of gaming machines," Mr Collaery said.
"The names of staff and officials involved could have been suppressed in accordance with usual policy without the necessity for a blanket suppression order. The media is well experienced in these privacy issues and the suggestion by the presidential member is a matter of concern.
"I'll now need to seek instructions as to whether there needs to be an application to have the suppression order so far as the facts are concerned lifted. This simply creates unnecessary work.
"We've got to remember this is not an issue that only concerns the anti-gaming lobby. Raiders members and supporters may equally be concerned their club has been fined and the performance of their officials is something they should know about."
The ACT Gambling and Racing Commission has remained tight-lipped about the fine since it was handed down on November 24, citing potential appeals.
Raiders general manager Simon Hawkins said the commission's report on the case was "riddled with errors". Both the commission's report and the "errors" identified by the club have not been made public.
