 Independent MP Andrew Wilkie has confirmed he'll support the government's watered down poker machine reforms. He says it's better than nothing. I'm giving this my reluctance support. This is not what I would do if it was up to me. It is very, very unfortunate that the government walked away from the agreement it made with me after the 2010 election. I'm not going to sing the praises of this. This is not a great solution, but frankly with the amendments that the government has agreed to, I think it's better than nothing. It may be all we can get and I'm not going to understand in the way of this modest win. The bill is unlikely to pass the lower house. The coalition has concerns about it. While the Greens say they won't support the government plan as it stands. What we'd like to see is we'd like to see the bill amended and improved. So we would support this bill if it also included $1 bits so that we had every machine in the country that was $1 bit ready. We'd also support the bill if we had a start date. Families and Community Services Minister Jenny Macklin has ruled out the $1 bits idea. She says that would be too expensive. This issue is not as simple as it seems. The advice we have is that the costs of introducing dollar bets would require around $1 billion to be spent just on changing the games alone. The Greens and Nick Xenophon dispute that $1 billion figure saying it would cost more like $200 million. Sukata, you've been involved as an advocate for pokey reform. Tell us what's your reaction to Andrew Wilkie's comments today. I might say pro bono activist. I'm actually doing it because I care. I know that's outrageous and unexpected, but I look, I've got to say, I mean, it's a sad day. I mean, Andrew has clearly been under the most enormous pressure, but in some ways today doesn't mean very much because this will not make it through the Senate. And, you know, I know some of the attacks have been, well, if you knock this legislation out, you know, you're left with nothing. Well, quite frankly, the legislation as it currently stands basically delivers nothing. Why is that? Well, what it does is it sets up a trial which will take a year or so. The clubs are still playing games in Canberra about what that's actually going to look like. When you actually get the trial eventually run, then it's going to be reviewed for a year or so and they'll decide whether it works or it doesn't work. And, you know, quite frankly, we haven't seen all the frame, the reference points for that. So who knows what that's going to look like. So by the time you get to 2016, 2018, you'll find that it's all been a dreadful failure and we'll be back where we've begun. But because there's a process in place, nothing meaningful can be done between now and then. It's a really rotten outcome. OK, let's go back to the idea of the $1 maximum bets. The Productivity Commission recommended that. Their idea was to reduce it from $10 maximum bets to $1 maximum bets, so that instead of losing a maximum of $1,200 an hour, you could lose only $120 an hour. Now, the Greens and Nick Xenophon say they'd like to amend that bill to bring in $1 bets. What hope is there of Labor supporting that particular aspect? Absolutely zero because their masters in the clubs don't want it to happen. I mean, if we come right back, I mean, if you remember that press conference in January, the Prime Minister and Minister Macklin both said that they were implementing the main recommendation of the Productivity Commission report and to your point, Steve, they weren't. The major recommendation was $1,120, so a maximum $1 bet with a maximum loss of $120 an hour. That was their recommendation and they suggested mandatory pre-commitment as a perhaps also. And let's not forget, this position of $1,120 was the position Andrew Wilkie took to the government in the first instance. And the billion dollar figure, is there any truth to that, Jenny Macklin's quote? I cannot tell you. I mean, not that I'll ever be listened to, but I'd love to see the costings. I wonder if someone could pop them on the table to have a look at. I know there have been plenty of FOIs. There's enough information out there to know that that's a nonsense number. It's not, quite frankly, that's much more exciting than the $43.7 billion hollow man number put on the NBN. It's just as flaky. Isn't it, isn't the giveaway here that the clubs who fought so hard against the original proposal, the mandatory pre-commitment on the basis of cost, and there was a lot of numbers thrown around there in the billions then, said it's impossible. It'll just, you know, hollow us out. We can't have it. Now, the same dollars presumably will be spent in getting these machines all retrofitted, ready to go to flick the switch allegedly in 2016. And there's not a peep out of the clubs about the cost. In fact, they're backing this. And let's not forget, guys, that in Victoria, you've already got a $5 maximum bet. And goodness gracious, the sky hasn't fallen. And no one said how much that cost. So presumably it wasn't too outrageous. The actual numbers are pretty small when you look at it. Very small. Peter, what's your reaction to Andrew Wilkie's backing down here? Well, just on the, you know, on the trial, I mean, what will happen? They'll all go down to Queenby and you know, so I mean, what this trial business seems to me, not that I know much about pokies, but that doesn't seem a really plausible proposition. I think the truth is that, as Sir really says, basically, nothing's going to come with this. And I sort of find it quite incredible because Andrew Wilkie thought that he was dealing with people that he can trust. And the fact is, he found out earlier this year that Labor, you know, turned against him. And yet, his political position is he's still prepared to stand up as he did today and said, Well, there's not much, but I'll give it some support. I mean, and that, you know, you know, it's going to happen politically. I mean, the Labor Party will run against him. And he will have no credibility with his own people. And the Labor Party will get the, you know, get the get the seat from him. So I mean, actually, it's a bit like the other issue, you know, sometimes it's better just to stand on the principle where you've been and make a stand there. What I think he's done is he's trashed his own credibility with his own people. It was Labor who stopped the Productivity Commission report in the first place. Well, there you go. Bigger issue, really understand what Andrew Wilkie was saying. What he's really fearful of is a change of government. Exactly. And that's right. That's right. But not just about pokies, though. It's not just about pokies. You can't stand the coalition. Yeah, but there's a reason there is no reason to believe given everything we've seen from the coalition. And by the way, I've spoken to all sorts of people on all sides of the house. And everybody will say to you privately hate poker machines, the disgusting dreadful things, scourge society, they're ripping the heart of society. But you ask either party to actually stand up and show some leadership on it. Neither party will. I've had liberals say to me, Kato, I don't know why you're banging on about this. This is a problem of Labor voters. It doesn't affect Liberal voters. I mean, that's pretty repulsive. But also in the same breath, I'll say, but I hate poker machines. This does no on it. This lack of leadership on both sides of the house. No on it for anyone. And the reality is the coalition is firmly opposed to any of these changes that's on the record as being opposed to $1 bets and mandatory pre commitments. The polls suggest there will be a change of government. That government will be in place, likely is not at least two, if not three terms. There ain't nothing going to happen. And I think I might have read in a newspaper recently that Anthony Ball was sort of sitting on a head table with Tony Abbott the other day at a function. I mean, you know, we understand the way this works. All right. First, it's the first time since 2000.