The federal government will spend the sitting fortnight that opened in Canberra on Monday trying to find a Senate deal on its gambling advertising bill, and the item most likely to move is not advertising at all. It is inducements.

The Interactive Gambling Amendment (Gambling Reform) Bill 2026 was introduced on 2 July. It would cap television gambling advertisements at three an hour between 6am and 8.30pm, ban them during live sport broadcasts, strip gambling branding from stadiums and player uniforms, and keep celebrities and influencers out of betting campaigns. If it passes, the restrictions start on 1 January 2027.

Labor cannot pass any of it alone. The Coalition and the Greens have both said they will vote against the bill in its current form, which leaves the government needing one of them or a bloc of crossbenchers.

Health Minister Mark Butler said on Monday he expected negotiations to run through the fortnight. "I'm confident again over the course of this sitting fortnight there will be constructive discussions between the government and the opposition about that," he said. "Obviously, inducements got a lot of attention last week. I'd be surprised if they weren't the subject of discussion over the course of this fortnight."

Deputy Opposition Leader Jane Hume put the same item at the front of the Coalition's list. "We'll be working with the government in good faith, negotiating with them over the next day or two to make sure that this legislation works for everybody," she said. "The most important thing, though, is that we take meaningful action on those predatory inducements."

Inducements moved to the centre of the debate through the Senate Environment and Communications Legislation Committee, which has been taking evidence on the bill since July. Former NRL player Luke Bateman told the committee about the offers wagering companies made to keep him betting. The committee reports on 17 August.

The bill's problem is that it has drawn fire from both directions. The Coalition says it does not go far enough on inducements and weakens some restrictions that already exist. The Greens and several independents want a full advertising ban and a national gambling regulator, neither of which is in the bill.

“It's basically friendless," independent ACT senator David Pocock said. "The only people who want this bill to pass are the gambling industry." Greens senator Barbara Pocock said the measures "don't deal with the essential recommendations of the Murphy report".”

That report is the reference point everyone in the argument is using. The 2023 parliamentary inquiry chaired by the late Peta Murphy recommended a phased total ban on gambling advertising across three years and warned in terms that partial bans do not work, because the industry moves its spending into whatever channel is left open.

The parties with money in the outcome have been in the room too. Free to air broadcasters, who carry the advertising revenue the caps would reduce, put submissions to the inquiry alongside church leaders and child welfare advocates. Wesley Mission argued the bill manages advertising at the margins and leaves too much of the design to the industry it regulates.

Nothing under negotiation this fortnight changes how gambling is taxed or how treatment for gambling harm is funded. Those sit with the states, and the national regulator that would pull the two together is the reform the crossbench has been unable to get onto the page.

The committee reports on 17 August. The government has said it is open to sensible amendments and has signalled it could pull the legislation if the changes demanded of it run too deep. Both of those positions are still on the table.