Welcome to Gambling Watch Global Community Blog,
a source for latest news, developments and reputable documentation and research on gambling. You'll find many helpful resources and links for anti-gambling advocates.
6/27/2009: we don’t want people who have gambling problems playing our games
Monday June 22 Lancaster News:
Ontario Gaming officials have their eye on you
The Ontario Lottery and Gaming Commission is preparing to install facial-recognition technology in all its gaming sites, including Flamborough, to keep out problem gamblers, possibly later this year.
Researchers had discovered it might be possible to recognize and also protect a person’s identity through biometric encryption.
Ms. McDougald said the technology would only be used for OLG’s self-exclusion program for problem gamblers. The program involves people who know they have a gambling problem to sign an agreement asking the casinos to ban them from entering all of its Ontario gaming sites.
Strange, after all these years, and a high award winning marketing and advertising program, having created close to a half million addicts according to Mr. Garfinkel, CEO of CAMH, along with a Winners Circle program to award the addicts for their losses.
All of a sudden, I see a half page OLG ad in my local newspaper, where the headline reads:
We don’t want people who have gambling problems playing our games
Gambling is supposed to be a fun and exciting form of entertainment.
And, that is certainly the message in all the pics and promotions, and winners holding up oversized cheques, with oversized prize winning dollars.
Wow.
The ad goes on:
However, 3.4 % of Ontarians experience gambling problems that can cause financial and social distress in their lives.
Suicide is never mentioned.
Thursday, June 29 2009 The Province:
“New program reaches out to B C gamblers and uses a different approach”. It‘s the friendly face of responsible gambling in B C.
But B C uses a target demographic of 4.6 % of B C adults classified as problem gamblers and another 8.6 % who are considered “ at-risk” players. (OLG never mentions risk, sorry risk.)
The outreach, or if you will, the reach out and gambling helpline, and free counseling services approach to distressed gamblers is much like parking the ambulances at the bottom of a cliff, while providing a speedy escalator service to the top of the cliff.
Is it not time to stop using this innocent 1 % bland number and start to realize that every one percent is at least made up of 100,000 citizens, humans , male, female, mothers, fathers, husbands, wives, children?
We have to mention relatives, co-workers, employers, lawyers, doctors, and all. Each victim of gambling’s innocent entertainment mislabel, can affect 10 to 17 others. Talk about second hand effects.
At least a dozen OLG law suits have been settled out of court with non disclosure clauses. How can a crown corporation, raising money for Ontario public health, settle a court case in the interest of it’s citizens, and not allow its citizens to benefit from the knowledge or nature of the harm?
I believe there are reports that attribute 80 % per cent of gambling monies come from slot machines, and 80 % of reported problems, come from this crack cocaine kind of gambling machines.
The basic fact is gambling causes addiction.
Pigeon, rat or human, all will succumb to this kind of intermittent reward form of gambling. B F Skinner said that we are not born gamblers.
In the Picov reports for OLG, it was reported that in Ontario, only 36 % of Ontarians gambled at OLG racetracks or casinos. This certainly does not sound like a consumer driven demand. The worst in all of this is that OLG turns around and blames the problem gambler for his/her addiction served up in the form of entertainment.
I believe the propensity number of 36 % for Ontario.
I also believe that less than 5 % of gamblers contribute close to 40 % of losses to OLG.
I don’t see how OLG can survive without the heavy losses of compulsive gamblers.
I also believe the Canadian economy would survive a great deal better if sixteen thousand million dollars was spent in the local economy where it belongs, rather than be sucked out of the community leaving nothing but addiction and a social mess.
But wait ! New York Times June 28, 2009
The government is shutting down every last legal casino and slot-machine parlor across the land, under an antivice plan promoted by Vladimir V. Putin that just a few months ago was widely perceived as far-fetched. But the result will be hundreds of thousands of people thrown out of work.
Does Mr. Putin know something we don’t ?
(Maybe there is something very wrong with creating addicts out of tax paying citizens.)
“There was a time when all these clubs and casinos grew like a cancer tumor,” said Moscow’s mayor, Yuri M. Luzhkov. “We will close them all. By July 1, Moscow will be clean.”
5/27/2009: Be thankful we’re casino-free
Posted By DAVE DALE May 14 2009
Yabba-dabba-do on the waterfront
My cousin in Sault Ste. Marie shared an interesting perspective the other day.
He said North Bay is lucky to have avoided the casino explosion of the 1990s.
Without getting into too many details, Kenny said there’s more and more families he knows being torn apart by the allure of winning it big.
And with the Soo facing economic challenges again, he expects the problem to grow in the next year.
I’ve never enjoyed casinos for more than a few hours a year. The sight of people sitting on stools wasting days of their lives is too vivid and depressing.
They call them gaming facilities to avoid the term gambling. And they spend a lot of money promoting the so-called excitement and marketing the shows to bring debit cards into the web.
A lot of people in North Bay still think it would be a good idea to have a casino in this area. I’m not one of them.
Advocates say it’s such an inconvenience to drive south to Rama near Orillia, west to the Sudbury Downs or east to Ottawa and Hull, Que., to feed their habit.
Why let such an opportunity slip through our fingers, they say, adding it would be a great attraction for tourists and anybody within a three-hour drive.
Mother Dear in Pittsburgh says my cousin and I are way off the mark.
She says we waste our time and money doing our thing” and we shouldn’t care if other people want to have their own kind of fun.
Many old folk don’t have anything else to do, she said, because they’re left to rot by their families and society doesn’t value them anyway.
No guilt trip there.
I’ve talked to a few North Bay area people about the subject this week and most of them are OK with not having a casino in the backyard.
It’s a nice place to visit once in a while, however, dropping by for a quick pull” at lunch or after work is too easy when there’s a big box of bells and whistles just around the corner.
And the problem with tourism is some of the people don’t leave.
Mayor Vic might get his shorts in a knot again. He’s already upset about the way provincial materials often leave out the Gateway City.
5/25/2009: Quebec Gaming Commission under investigation
The Quebec class action suit against Lotto Quebec is underway.
The coverage is picking up after ethics professor, Yves Boisvert dropped a bombshell. He was commissioned to do a report for Lotto Quebec in 2002 and discovered in 2008 that his 114 page report he say was handed in had been trimmed down to 1/2 that.
The english coverage doesn’t quite do the seriousness of this allegation justice.
The report about compulsive gambling was commissioned by the gaming commission in 2002 and handed in the following year by four independent researchers.
The government body authorized them to publish their study without saying who paid for it.
It was only in the fall of 2008 that the report resurfaced and was tabled at the ongoing trial into the Loto-Quebec lawsuit.
The lead researcher of the study was called to testify to explain his findings. Yves Boisvert, an ethics professor at the public administration school ENAP, told the court the gaming commission didn’t table the original 114-page report but a shorter and “fabricated” version.
He said the “truncated” report was downsized to 53 pages and left out significant concerns raised about the wide availability of VLTs and other aspects of government-run gambling.
Quebec Public Security Minister Jacques Dupuis has ordered an internal investigation into the Alcohol, Racing and Gaming Commission.
Here is the google translationof the original La Presse story. We’ll try to get one of our French speaking Gambling Watch Global workers to summarize this information and lay out the ramifications. - admin
French version
Administrator5/20/2009: LCBO profits
LCBO - Liqour Control Board of Ontario Profit: 2006/2007: 1.30 billion dollars
I find it very distressing for the media not to challenge the term”profits” for LCBO reports considering the continuous daily and weekly reports in all media of the costs” of alcohol in day-to-day life.
No single drug–or family of drugs– is more associated with death, crime, suicide and FASD, as well as linked to both tobacco and gambling problems.
If it was dispensed in a pharmacy, it would be interesting to see the warning labels attached to its use.
There is probably no more dangerous drug in the world, and yet the most advertised and promoted.
Public health?
Bill Clark
5/5/2009: Dear Paul Pellizzari and the OLG - it’s more than passing strange
OLG Response to Gambling Watch Global
Re: “open letter” to OLG
Your letter of April 2, 2009 raises a number of concerns about problem gambling. I welcome the opportunity to respond to each issue you raise, and describe how OLG continuously seeks to expand its action plan to mitigate harm and risk associated with problem gambling. - Paul Pellizzari
“It is well documented that 40% of OLG gambling income comes from losses of 5% of gamblers and that just 20% of Ontarians provide 80% of the losses which the OLG call profit.” - Bill Clark
That information I gave above comes from a University of Lethbridge study released in June 2004: The Demographic Sources of Ontario Gaming Revenue. (Prepared for The Ontario Problem Gambling Research Centre) The cost of this study was approximately 200 thousand dollars.
• We are aware of the study, authored by Williams and Wood 2004, which found that “about 35% of Ontario gaming revenue is derived from moderate and severe problem gamblers.”
The researchers qualify this finding as “tentative” because the sample size was small (i.e. 32 individuals), and therefore not representative of the general population. If you are aware of other studies, we would be interested in learning of these. -Paul Pellizzari
On November 17 1997, Time magazine published a simple graph in an article titled: Where Gambling Dollars Come From. Gambling profits depend on the losses of gambling addicts.
In terms of other studies may I direct your attention to letters written to the OLGC in your own files, prior to your Picov input study. And the 1999 Wynne study: Problem Gambling Public Awareness Campaigns in North America.
It seems to those of us, Ontarians concerned for the public health of our fellow citizens, that it is more than passing strange that even government agencies involved in gambling seem generally unaware of the existence of this report. Should we therefore be surprised that most of our “public” appears to be totally unaware of the dangers that gambling poses to an unaware and uninformed populace?
The OLGC’s attention was drawn to Managerial and Decision Economics, John Wiley & Sons May 2001. This issue was devoted to social and economic analysis of gambling. In this volume there is an article by two Canadian economists as well as other recognized professionals.
Canada has yet to produce a cost/benefit study, but other countries whose governments are not direct connected to promoting gambling revenue are more critical. Cost/benefit studies have been done in Australia, New Zealand, UK and the US.
What about the US National Gambling Impact Study (June 1999) where a great deal of sworn testimony was given to US Congress and data came directly from the American Gambling Association.
As a retired pharmacist, I am aware of drug companies which write their own product monographs without peer review. These product monographs are not acceptable for the AMA (American Medical Association), CMA (Canadian Medical Association), CAMH (Canadian Association of Mental Health), or Lancet.
The amount spent by the four Ontario casinos for marketing & promotion is reported to be greater than 500,000,000 dollars per year. This amount is over and above money allocated for regular OLG advertising (Toronto Star). When the OLG confirms that a 100 plus thousand dollars is spent marketing to one addict alone, (Hamilton Spectator) this expenditure goes beyond enticement and beyond basic decency.
• OLG relies on research from credible sources and seeks guidance through formal relationships with expert groups – including CAMH, Ontario Problem Gambling Research Centre, and the Responsible Gambling Council – on how best to apply the best available data to the development of RG policies and programs. - Paul Pellizzari
I have addressed that above. These are sources used by promoters, and all are paid for by gambling money. Balanced harm and cost reports are not included. I would suggest peer review. Can you tell me if any of these studies are reviewed by anyone other than promoters?
“$2 billion of advertising and promotion by the OLG in the last 10 years.”
• OLG advertising complies with provincial regulations under the Gaming Control Act. We have also gone further by developing strict internal ad and marketing guidelines.
• As part of the entertainment business, we advertise and promote our products. A large part of our marketing budget is spent by resort casinos competing for business with gaming facilities across the Canada-US border. - Paul Pellizzari
This amount is reported to be greater than 500,000,000 dollars per year and is over and above regular OLG advertising. See Andrew Chung, The Toronto Star; Who Should Pay (2004) and Casinos not taking chances in court (2009).
• All individuals who register for self-exclusion cease to receive distributions of all gaming advertising, promotions and complementaries. - Paul Pellizzari
Point #1. The OLG made the rules.
Point #3. Individuals may well cease to receive direct mailings and promotions, but are still subject to all the daily output of OLG advertising placed in newspapers, on TV, and all other visual stimuli. To a half million addicted people, this continuous input to the addictive mind is harmful.
The background article to CBC’s Playing the Machines looks at the fact that suicide related deaths are not nationally tracked and the Ontario gambling suicides are increasing. (Dave Seglins, Ontario gambling-linked suicides rise.)
The background article to CTV W5’s Winners and Losers looks at the failure in enforcement of the self-exclusion policy.
The OLG continues in denial. Take a look at the comments under the CBC article, or at any recent article on self-exclusion which permits comments. The public is waking up to lack of care.
There was a blanket denial from the OLG that lottery sales vendors could cheat winners at the distribution level for years. There is now a new self verification ticket machine in Ontario.
Perhaps Bob Edmonds didn’t die in vain. In his case the legal fees to fight him in court were greater than the prize he claimed. As the Canadian public well knows, the OLG apology to Edmonds did not arrive in his lifetime.
Now a new pollutant enters the public sphere.
I must congratulate OLG for turning a harmful criticism around (the Edmonds case) and into an wow marketing tool, a by-product of lotto ticket savvy and education. I’m talking about that stupid catchy funky voice that confirms every lottery ticket stuck in to a scanner, plays that lotto tune and announces “winner/ gagnant” . One finds one’s-self looking at the player the tune is directed at and wondering what the great prize may be.
It is hard to find a business where OLG does not pursue us. This is a new level of intrusion.
• OLG has also launched a major myth-busting campaign and launched educational tools such as the website KnowYourLimit.ca, and a video co-developed with the Ontario Problem Gambling Research Centre.
“$39M dollars spent this year on prevention and research…isn’t a lot” - Paul Pellizzari
Relative to the annual sum of player losses per year - approximately 1 cent per dollar is spent by the OLG for prevention and research. Most of this prevention money goes in new, unnecessary and yet more industry favourable and repetitive in-house research. 39 million dollars yearly for research and prevention out of the annual 6 billion OLG intake is not very much.
• Ontario’s problem gambling strategy is one of the best funded programs in North America, and likely the world. In 2009-10 this funding will increase to $40 million. Since fiscal year 1999-2000, approximately $322 million has been allocated to the Province, which includes an estimated $40 million allocation for Fiscal 2009-10.
• The amount allocated to the strategy is set by policy of the government of Ontario. The Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care and the Ministry of Health Promotion distribute these funds to independent researchers, addictions counselors and outreach experts. - Paul Pellizzari
It would be interesting to see the amount spent on treatment over the years compared to continual repeated research. Most of the people I speak to go to Gamblers Anonymous for treatment and find it hard. They are reluctant to talk and ashamed of themselves.
This repeated research remains self defeating because research already done is not being applied. We have read articles of Public Health employees who have been muted, or muzzled about speaking out on gambling problems. Nowhere do we hear people should cease gambling, we hear about responsible gambling.
Funding policies also mute public debate on social costs of gambling says critics (.pdf) Sue Bailey and Louise Elliott Canadian Press February 27, 2003, is an interesting article with good background.
Have you read Dr. Peter McKenna (Terminal Damage) or a recent editorial in the Thunder Bay Chronicle talk about the impossibility of getting anyone to talk about gambling damage publicly?
I agree that Ontario has a well funded program comparative to the rest of North America. The question remains. How effective is that programs voice against a billion promotion dollars?
“OLG winner’s cards over the years have been used exclusively to reward addiction” - Bill Clark
The difficulty is that so much money is dependant on so few people, that one has to be very careful. Fully one third of OLG money comes from 5% of gamblers. Is the responsible gambling program promoted because OLG cannot afford to lose that segment of addicted support ?
A 2001 Picov study seemed to indicate that only 36% of Ontarians used OLG facilities and yes, it also mentions suicides.
• Player’s cards are optional. - Paul Pellizzari
However, the addicted mind cannot make a correct choice.
The addict wants his share of player rewards credited to his account.
He or she is going to plug in his card and connect just like pictures show - happy smiling addicts, all connected to the slots.
What about making player cards compulsory? Every one must use them. Have a policy such as Holland does; at first signs of self abuse, the player card privilege is cancelled.
That means no playing anywhere in Ontario.
OLG winner cards follow players in order to reward loss.
Holland analyses the same player information and determines rate of loss, but sets a point where gambling employees recognize reckless and addictive playing. The player is then flagged and is called into a casino office. There they are questioned on their ability to lose the amount they are playing and this is done to prevent active self abuse and criminal acts.
In Ontario OLG patrons do not have to sign up nor do they have to use the cards if they have one.
• When people indicate that they want to self-exclude to take a break from gambling their loyalty cards are rendered inactive. - Paul Pellizzari
That may be so, but by this time the harm is done, and if they must gamble, and they must, they are still admitted and OLG continues to cash in.
Rather than waiting until it is too late for the player, let the OLG take the initiative.
Program OLG computers to recognize addictive behaviors and assess the individual before it is too late. Look at behaviour and compare rates of loss to annual income averages. The OLG is perfectly equipped to cross reference information such as Switzerland does. (See the letter to former Ontario Health Minister George Smitherman from Dr. Paul Garfinkel, November 2004).
In April this year, 3 female players who reported having lost hundreds of thousands of dollars were recognized and rewarded for their addiction by the OLG.
A Quebec addict admitted he had a problem and went beyond signing a self-exclusion contract. He contacted the local casino by letter and phone asking the contract be honoured. I realize this occurred is Quebec, however his story demonstrates a point.
When I enquired of an OLG lottery agent about over selling tickets to an addict, she advised me in no uncertain terms that she was there to sell tickets.
When OLG and a self aware addict sign a self exclusion contact there is no stronger plea for help from an addict.
This act of self admission is not supported by the OLG. The OLG has defaulted on it’s contractual obligations.
“No drug has a higher suicide record than pathological gambling.”- Bill Clark
• We are not aware of any study that ranks the type of addiction as a determinant of suicide. Nevertheless, any death linked to gambling is of concern. For this reason, OLG has put in place various initiatives to help refer people to the professional guidance they need (see details below). - Paul Pellizzari
I find the above OLG statement very hard to accept. It has been awhile that I left pharmacy and I do not recall any drug with the continuous mention of suicide that is associated with pathological gambling. VLTs linked to “crack cocaine” VLTs and slots are interchanageable.
Before you have suicidal ideas call this number
Quebec slots come with warnings “avant les idees suicidaires”
The Canada Safety Council has written the Prime Minister, premiers and provincial coroners about gambling suicide.
Nearly all peer reviewed studies link this complex and tragic side effect. Suicide is a side effect. Children of gamblers are far more like to commit suicide. See Canadian Roulette at the Canada Safety Council website.
All this makes me want to ask; where have you been?
Where are you now? Are you going anywhere with all this?
I would invite you to read Manitoba Gambling and Problem Gambling 2006. (.pdf) There is a section on suicide.
I also invite you to look at studies about Las Vegas and Atlantic City and their contracts with addicts, or Quebec coroner reports.
Regarding the use of the term, “gaming”, I appreciate that it may be a word more commonly used within the industry, OLG is less focused on such semantics and is working to continuously improve its role in the task at hand - which is to reduce harm associated with problem gambling.
In addition to addressing your specific issues, I’d like to provide an overview of our multi-pronged responsible gambling program:
• Prevention and Support through the creation of 24 on-site Responsible Gaming Resource Centers so far, run by renowned prevention experts, the Responsible Gambling Council. All gaming sites will have these centres by next year.
• The RGRCs serve as a bridge for referrals to professional help and community care
• Specialized training for all OLG staff, in particular our 6,000+ gaming employees using a curriculum designed by national addiction experts from CAMH.
• Contribution and support for research in problem gambling.
• Targeted education for players and the public about the realities of gambling through myth-busting and other materials, supported by the Know Your Limit campaign and website.
• Surveillance employees in all gaming facilities work with floor staff and security on all OLG Responsible Gaming programs.
• OLG slot machines issue a system alert to flag a self-excluded person who attempts to use a loyalty card for slot play.
• Pilot testing new technology in facial recognition designed for detection of self-excluded individuals. - Paul Pellizzari
How can anyone believe you (OLG) have any interest in citizens and their humanity until you stop aggressive saturation Pavlovian marketing?
If you want to train a laboratory rat to push a button, don’t reward him with a food pellet after every push - vary the number of pushes required for the payoff. Give him a pellet after 4 pushes one time, 16 the next, then 3, then 23.
By manipulating the length between payoffs researchers can led a rat, pigeon or human into addictive behaviors.
They could stretch the ratio to the point where the rat would literally drop over from exhaustion (Burt Constable, Pigeon, Rat or Human, Gambling Is Addictive. Daily Herald May 6, 2000)
How can the OLG be believed when your contractual obligations regarding self exclusion contracts are not enforced? It is known there are nearly 1/2 million problem gamblers in Ontario and that about 12 thousand have self-exclusion contracts. You acknowledged this in The Globe and Mail’s recent piece, The Big Bluff.
What is the point of these contracts if they aren’t enforced?
Again, thank you for your interest in our responsible gambling programs. For more information, please see KnowYourLimit.ca. - Paul Pellizzari
No addict knows their limit, no addict respects their limit, and no addict chooses to be an addict.
Is the OLG responsibly respecting self-exclusion contracts instead of blaming people who admit they need help?
There has to be better awareness by the OLG that gambling is addictive.
Finally.
After 10 years of advocacy we have a remark and response from OLG.
Thank you for commenting.
No reader comments yet - add yours See related articles: Activism, Canada, Wisdom and its absence 
Bill Clark5/1/2009: OLG responds to Open letter to Kelly McDougald
OLG Response to Gambling Watch Global
Your letter of April 2, 2009 raises a number of concerns about problem gambling. I welcome the opportunity to respond to each issue you raise, and describe how OLG continuously seeks to expand its action plan to mitigate harm and risk associated with problem gambling.
“It is well documented that 40% of OLG gambling income comes from losses of 5% of gamblers and that just 20% of Ontarians provide 80% of the losses which the OLG will call profit.”
• We are aware of the study, authored by Williams and Wood 2004, which found that “about 35% of Ontario gaming revenue is derived from moderate and severe problem gamblers.”
The researchers qualify this finding as “tentative” because the sample size was small (i.e. 32 individuals), and therefore not representative of the general population. If you are aware of other studies, we would be interested in learning of these.
• OLG relies on research from credible sources and seeks guidance through formal relationships with expert groups – including CAMH, Ontario Problem Gambling Research Centre, and the Responsible Gambling Council – on how best to apply the best available data to the development of RG policies and programs.
“$2 billion of advertising and promotion by the OLG in the last 10 years.”
• OLG advertising complies with provincial regulations under the Gaming Control Act. We have also gone further by developing strict internal ad and marketing guidelines.
• As part of the entertainment business, we advertise and promote our products. A large part of our marketing budget is spent by resort casinos competing for business with gaming facilities across the Canada-US border.
• All individuals who register for self-exclusion cease to receive distributions of all gaming advertising, promotions and complementaries.
• OLG has also launched a major myth-busting campaign and launched educational tools such as the website KnowYourLimit.ca, and a video co-developed with the Ontario Problem Gambling Research Centre.
“$39M dollars spent this year on prevention and research…isn’t a lot”
• Ontario’s problem gambling strategy is one of the best funded program in North America, and likely the world. In 2009-10 this funding will increase to $40 million. Since fiscal year 1999-2000, approximately $322 million has been allocated to the Province, which includes an estimated $40 million allocation for Fiscal 2009-10.
• The amount allocated to the strategy is set by policy of the government of Ontario. The Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care and the Ministry of Health Promotion distribute these funds to independent researchers, addictions counselors and outreach experts.
“OLG winner’s card over the years have been used exclusively to reward addiction”
• Player’s cards are optional. Patrons do not have to sign up nor do they have to use the cards if they have one.
• When people indicate that they want to self-exclude to take a break from gambling their loyalty cards are rendered inactive.
“No drug has a higher suicide record than pathological gambling.”
• We are not aware of any study that ranks the type of addiction as a determinant of suicide.
Nevertheless, any death linked to gambling is of concern. For this reason, OLG has put in place various initiatives to help refer people to the professional guidance they need (see details below).
Regarding the use of the term, “gaming”, I appreciate that it may be a word more commonly used within the industry, OLG is less focused on such semantics and is working to continuously improve its role in the task at hand - which is to reduce harm associated with problem gambling.
In addition to addressing your specific issues, I’d like to provide an overview of our multi-pronged responsible gambling program:
• Prevention and Support through the creation of 24 on-site Responsible Gaming Resource Centres so far, run by renowned prevention experts, the Responsible Gambling Council. All gaming sites will have these centres by next year.
• The RGRCs serve as a bridge for referrals to professional help and community care
• Specialized training for all OLG staff, in particular our 6,000+ gaming employees using a curriculum designed by national addiction experts from CAMH.
• Contribution and support for research in problem gambling.
• Targeted education for players and the public about the realities of gambling through myth-busting and other materials, supported by the Know Your Limit campaign and website.
• Surveillance employees in all gaming facilities work with floor staff and security on all OLG Responsible Gaming programs.
• OLG slot machines issue a system alert to flag a self-excluded person who attempts to use a loyalty card for slot play.
• Pilot testing new technology in facial recognition designed for detection of self-excluded individuals.
Again, thank you for your interest in our responsible gambling programs. For more information, please see KnowYourLimit.ca.
Paul Pellizzari
Director of Policy
OLG
4/23/2009: Thunder Bay Editorial says it all - almost.
Another gambler falls to addiction
The woman sought to blame Thunder Bay‘s Ontario gambling casino for her having ultimately stolen $173,000 from the bank where she worked 30 years in order to continue trying to win it all back. But Justice Patrick Smith ruled Tuesday, in a wise and reasonable decision, that the lures OLG trolls in front of gamblers‘ noses notwithstanding, stealing large sums from the bank‘s account holders is a serious criminal offence that cannot be excused. Jail time is essential to demonstrate the necessity of personal responsibility and the woman is going away for a year.
It recalls another local case where an office manager also used her position of trust and access to rob her employer of $673,000 to feed what her lawyer called “an awful gambling addiction.” She was jailed for 14 months.
These cases should serve as a warning to friends and family of those who spend inordinate amounts of time at the casino that addiction is common (288,000 Ontarians and up to 1.2 million Canadians are at risk), it is serious, and it cannot be used as a crutch to escape consequences.
There is no alternatives in cases like this but is a solution.
With a little creative programming as in Holland, slots could ring bells when players when players exceed normal play. For instance, in studying the rate and amount of bets comparing to an average Ontario income, the computer can shut down a slot players time, force a break, indicate the loss for another three hours of play and save the individual. Reading this editorial it appears OLG can legally accept stolen money with impunity and continue to reward the losing player. The player is rewarded by comps and perks.
Neither can the Ontario Lottery and Gaming Corp., escape responsibility for the large and growing problem of addiction at its 27 venues. And the provincial government cannot deny its ultimate responsibility for counting so much on the millions it gets from gambling that it has failed to ensure that addiction‘s consequences are prevented.
More than 12,000 Ontarians have reached the point where they realize they are in trouble and have signed self-exclusion forms to force the casinos to deny them entry. But in spite of the long availability of common facial recognition technology (now finally being tested in Sault Ste. Marie), Ontario casinos still depend on security guards trying to memorize the pictures of those on the self-exclusion list. Of those 12,500 people who have taken the responsibility to seek protection from themselves, less than 1,000 a year are ever denied entry.
Mr. Garfinkel CEO of CAMH expressed his concern to former Ontario Minister of Health George Smitherman (2004) regarding the approximately 450 thousand provincial residents addicted to gambling. This makes 12 thousand exclusion forms very small. There are many more out there.
Still today the Ontario problem gambling help line averages 50 calls a day.What more can the public expect with the Pavlovian marking program of the OLG?
bill clark4/21/2009: Thunder Bay grandmother gets a year behind bars
A Thunder Bay woman who misused more than $170,000 from the bank where she was a long-time employee isn‘t entitled to serve her sentence in the community despite the fact she was addicted to gambling, a Superior Court judge has ruled.
In declaring that there wasn‘t enough reason for him deviate from sentencing guidelines, Justice Patrick Smith handed Donna Mildred O‘Neill a one-year jail term for theft.
“Without the existence of special circumstances, for this court to impose anything less than a term of incarceration would send a message to others similarly inclined that, if caught, you will not go to jail,” Smith said. “That is not a message that would accord with the sentencing principle of denunciation.”
Following her release from jail, O‘Neill will be on probation for a further two years.
Gambling Watch Global has followed her story. In the sentencing the judge said the consequences of her actions must not be allowed to transform her into the victim.
At an earlier hearing, the Crown asked for a jail sentence of 18 months.
Defence counsel Gil Labine asked for a conditional sentence, arguing that the provincial government turned O‘Neill into an addict.
Smith heard that O‘Neill would spend $10,000 a month at the casino, and would sometimes be there until 5 a.m., even on work days.
“Not surprisingly, like most gamblers, (she) did not win over the course of time,” Smith said, noting that O‘Neill exhausted her credit cards and then turned to stealing from her place of employment.
“As her debt grew, so did her stress, which she relieved by gambling more, and so a vicious cycle developed that saw her spiral into the realm of addiction – the dark and hidden side of the gambling industry.”
Since then, O‘Neill has lost her job, her house, her pension, and has declared personal bankruptcy. The crime also impacted her former co-workers and besmirched the bank‘s name.
Smith said a court is not the place to comment on the government‘s regulation of the gaming industry. But in analysing the history of gambling in Ontario, he quoted reports that said gambling can become a dangerous addiction. However, the government is aware of that, and has committed to providing assistance and counselling for those with a problem.
“In short, the government accepts and acknowledges that addiction is an inevitable cost of promoting gambling – a cost of doing business,” he concluded.
But does that make it a “special circumstance” that someone like O‘Neill is deserving of lesser punishment for a criminal offence that normally calls for actual jail time? In the end, he said no, rejecting O‘Neill‘s argument that the blame for her conduct is the government‘s, not hers.
4/19/2009: Gambling addiction Class action suit against OLG
A $3.5-billion lawsuit against the Ontario Lottery and Gaming Corp. on behalf of more than 10,000 problem gamblers — with ramifications for many thousands more across Canada — reveals a devastating glimpse into a lucrative government business that leaves some of its best customers in financial ruin.
The lawsuit, which contains allegations not yet proven in court, portrays an unsavoury industry with addictive slot machines, bank machines readily available to inveterate gamblers and the availability of house credit.
At the centre of this proposed class action is Peter Aubrey Dennis, 49, of Markham, Ont., north of Toronto, who lost his life’s savings and almost his family. His wife Zubin Noble is the second representative plaintiff.
His gambling problems and the resulting stress led to his youngest son’s attempted suicide and his eldest son — once an A student — did so poorly in school he was held back one year. Under constant stress, Ms. Noble developed a tremor according to court documents filed Thursday.
When gambling addicts acknowledge their addiction, put themselves on self-exclusion lists, why are we allowing casinos and the government to inqnore a step they’ve taken? Why is the OLG publicly blaming addicts and attempting to influence public opinion about failing to enforce the self-exclusion safeguard?
Though the tally on how much he lost is still not known, Mr. Dennis gambled $500,000 from 2001 to May 23, 2004, according to court documents. The day after, on May 24, he went to the slots area of Woodbine Racetrack, said he had a serious gambling problem and that he wanted to sign the self-exclusion form.
He signed that form, was photographed and told by a security guard that he could be charged with trespassing if he entered any of the OLG’s casinos or gambling venues, of which there are 27.
But Mr. Dennis did return — one week after signing that form — and then regularly for three more years at Woodbine Racetrack and Casino Rama. He was stopped only once, according to his affidavit, at which point he left.
“After he self-excluded, Mr. Dennis reportedly returned to Casino Rama and Woodbine Racetrack hundreds of times without being detected and without using any disguises,” according to a report by Robert Williams, the Lethbridge co-ordinator of the Alberta Gaming Research Institute, that is part of the 1,873 pages of court documents.
4/14/2009: The problem with gambling exposes
Recently, the CBC documentary Playing the Machines and the W-Five episode “Winners and Losers” featured stories about people for whom gambling became seriously out of control. I commend the interviewees in the shows for speaking out about a painful subject; their stories about a devastating problem are compelling. However, the themes that ran through both programs — buttressed by the opinions of so-called experts — cause me concern, because they are so at odds with the facts.
In reality, the vast majority of gamblers do not experience the problems highlighted in these television shows. Repeated research by the Canadian Partnership for Responsible Gambling shows that approximately 1% of Canadians can be classified as problem gamblers. This is confirmed by researchers Jamie Wiebe and Rachel Volberg, who determined that the rate of problem gambling has remained consistent over the last 20 years at approximately 1% of the population across Canada (and around the world), regardless of the year, jurisdiction, sample size or methodology. Further, they found that jurisdictions that combined the introduction of new forms of gambling with effective public awareness campaigns about the dangers of gambling (and how to avoid them) were likely to experience a decrease in problem gambling numbers.
As leading experts on addictions and pathological behaviour tell us, the problem lies within the affected individual, and not in the bottle, device or object of his addiction. Howard J. Scaffer, associate professor at Harvard Medical School and director of the Division on Addictions at Cambridge Health Alliance, puts it this way: “There is a myth regarding addictive behaviours around gambling, that the game causes the disorder. In fact, the game does not cause the disorder, because if it did, everyone who played the game would end up with the problem. It’s the relationship of a person with vulnerabilities to the games that they play that essentially determines whether or not they will have a problem.”
In a reaction to CTV’s Winners and Losers Bill Rutsey says Canada spends more per capita than any other country on addiction enhancements. He to outline what the gambling industry says it is doing regarding self-exclusion programs; steps the gambling industry calls enhancements.
National Post April 7, 2009 Bill Rutsey
President and CEO of the Canadian Gaming Association.
Gambling Watch Global writes the OLG regarding Winners and Losers.
