General News
12 June, 2026
Greenberger pushes council role in gambling debate
NORTHERN Grampians councillor Jenny Greenberger says local government should not shy away from social issues affecting its communities, even when the power to solve them rests elsewhere. That view was put to the test at last week’s council meeting, where Cr Greenberger successfully pushed for a clause preventing council from granting future long-term leases or licences that would introduce additional poker machines on council-owned or managed land.
The amendment passed after councillors split 3-3, with mayor Karen Hyslop exercising her casting vote to carry the motion.
Cr Greenberger said the clause was never intended to solve problem gambling on its own, but to allow council to play a role in raising awareness of an issue she believes continues to affect families and communities across the region.
“I believe local government can and should be leaders in our community in these sorts of areas, and not just say, ‘Well, it’s a state problem, or it’s a federal problem’,” she said.
“If we’re going to be serious about having a health and wellbeing plan, it should be part of what we do.”
Cr Greenberger said her interest in the issue developed through her involvement with the Victorian Local Governance Association’s gambling working group and through her previous work in education, community services and wellbeing.
She said gambling harm often remained hidden, despite its impact on individuals and families.
“It’s very, very much a hidden issue,” she said.
“Like most social issues or social justice issues, it’s often the most vulnerable where the greatest impact is felt, particularly not only on themselves but on their families and on their children.”
During the meeting, Cr Greenberger said more than $4 million was spent on poker machines each year across Northern Grampians Shire and questioned what that money could do if spent in local businesses instead.
“Could you imagine what impact it would have on our small businesses if that amount of money was actually spent in small businesses rather than feeding poker machines?” she said.
Cr Greenberger said the new clause would not remove existing machines or affect current venue operations.
“What we have said is that we do not want additional machines,” she said.
The vote exposed differing views about the role council should play in addressing gambling harm.
Cr Karen Probst opposed the amendment, arguing future lease and licence applications should be assessed on their overall merits rather than having gambling singled out in policy.
“Electronic gaming machines will be a disadvantage, I agree, but there will be other factors that may be advantages,” she said.
“I think any future decisions should be based on all the factors and not just on the gambling issue.”
Cr Probst also questioned whether council should single out one form of addiction.
“If we make a stand on one addiction, why are we not making a stand on other addictions?” she said.
Cr Murray Emerson also voted against the clause, saying he believed there was “a place in our community for poker machines”, while Cr Jack Blake said reducing access would not necessarily address the underlying causes of addiction.
Cr Greenberger said the decision was also about starting a broader public discussion about gambling harm and the role councils can play within their limited sphere of influence.
“It was an opportunity for two reasons — one, to prevent additional poker machines being introduced on council-owned or managed land, but also as an item where we could get some community awareness,” she said.
“Who else is going to do it if we don’t do it?”
Read More: Stawell