Newspaper ‘slapdown’ that backfired: Minister’s order legally flawed

In June 2026, the New South Wales government found itself embroiled in a significant legal and political controversy concerning its handling of gambling regulation. At the heart of the dispute lies a ministerial directive issued in 2025 by Gaming and Racing Minister David Harris, which sought to limit the Independent Liquor and Gaming Authority (ILGA) from prioritizing harm minimization in its regulatory decisions. This directive, intended to counterbalance criticisms of the gaming industry's impact on the community, has now been challenged as legally flawed and potentially invalid under existing legislation.

The controversy began when ILGA Chairperson Caroline Lamb made strong statements about the gaming sector, asserting that pubs and clubs lacked a "social licence to rape and pillage the community." Her comments sparked a sharp reaction from Minister Harris, who responded with a rare written ministerial directive. This directive instructed the ILGA not to prioritize harm minimization over other considerations such as the "balanced development" of the gaming industry when evaluating applications for additional poker machines or changes to operating hours.

This move was perceived as both a direct rebuke to Lamb and an effort to suppress further criticism of the gaming industry, which generates substantial revenue for the state. The directive was subsequently leaked to The Daily Telegraph, which described it as a "slapdown" against ILGA and its chair. However, the legal implications of this directive have since come into question, particularly after receiving legal advice from Wesley Mission, a prominent Sydney-based charity focused on social welfare issues.

Legal experts from Thomson Geer and Dominique Hogan-Doran from 5 Wentworth Chambers advised that the ministerial directive conflicts with the Gaming Machines Act, which mandates that harm minimization be a primary concern for the ILGA. According to these legal opinions, the act, rather than ministerial directives, holds the ultimate authority in guiding the ILGA's decision-making processes. These findings were echoed in a recent ruling by the NSW Civil and Administrative Tribunal, which dismissed the government's argument that the ILGA should not prioritize harm minimization.

The tribunal's decision came in response to a challenge by pub operator Blairgrove Pty Ltd, which argued that the ILGA had incorrectly used harm minimization as a reason to deny an application to increase the number of poker machines at the Grand Shanghai Hotel in Burwood. The ILGA denied the request, citing potential increases in gambling-related harm and abuse due to the area's already high levels of gaming intensity and addiction rates. In a notable stance against the ministerial directive, the ILGA emphasized that the directive would not influence its decisions regarding gaming license applications, arguing that the directive could not override the legislative mandate allowing it to prioritize harm minimization if deemed necessary.

Stu Cameron, CEO of Wesley Mission, criticized the NSW Labor government for historically underemphasizing harm reduction strategies, despite the growing urgency highlighted by the projected $10 billion in poker machine losses for the year. He stressed that the government possesses the necessary tools to implement effective gambling reforms but has yet to apply them effectively in practice.

Despite the legal challenges and criticisms, the gaming minister's office maintained that the ILGA should consider and balance all relevant factors, including harm minimization, when carrying out its duties. However, the spokesperson did not explicitly endorse the 2025 ministerial directive's assertion that all objectives should be given equal weight in decision-making related to pokie applications. Instead, they emphasized the importance of promoting public confidence in the ILGA's decision-making processes and the conduct of its members.

The ILGA's responses to inquiries indicate that it continues to operate independently of the controversial directive, considering each case based on its unique circumstances and evidence. As the debate surrounding gambling reform intensifies, it remains to be seen whether the government will adjust its approach in light of the legal and ethical concerns raised by stakeholders and the public alike. With the upcoming NSW Labor conference set to address the issue, the future direction of gambling policy in New South Wales hangs in the balance.