Another independent MP, Tony Windsor, whose vote will be crucial on pokies reform, said yesterday the $1 bet limit option was ''worth a look''. The gaming industry, which has reportedly amassed a $40 million war chest, including $250,000 from Woolworths, to fight the pre-commitment reform model, attacked the Greens policy, saying it would do more harm to clubs than the current plan. The Age reported yesterday that Mr Wilkie was open to a change in his position on poker machine reform. His original proposal to Ms Gillard when he was negotiating minority government last year was for the mandatory transformation of all poker machines into low-impact machines. On those with $1 bet limits, gamblers can lose a maximum of $120 an hour. Independent MPs were briefed by the Greens last week about the ''circuit-breaker'' policy, with all crossbenchers open to the idea, Senator Richard di Natale said. Mr Windsor has stated he would not support reforms that hurt clubs in his electorate because of prohibitive set-up costs, but said he was attracted to the Greens' policy because of the low impost it would place on small community clubs.

''It would mean that the capital cost of the smaller clubs having to outlay quite large amounts of money to get their machines into the pre-commitment deal would be avoided,'' Mr Windsor told The Saturday Age. Mr Windsor lashed out at the the pokies lobby's bid for public support, calling it the ''most illogically designed strategy of any campaign'' he had seen. ''What they have done is actually spent millions of dollars highlighting the problem that they said wasn't there.'' Clubs Australia dismissed the Greens plan as another misguided ''silver bullet'', saying the it would be too costly to program the machines to only have a $1 maximum bet and it would do nothing to help problem gamblers. Chief executive Anthony Ball said the plan cherry-picked aspects of the Productivity Commission report on gambling andthe Greens had failed to consult the industry.

He admitted the industry's preferred reform was for voluntary pre-commitment, which would be installed only by clubs that could afford it. The system would not be linked, so players could switch venues once they reached their pre-set limit. Clubs Australia have committed $9.5 million to the campaign against poker machine reforms, which Mr Ball said would ramp up around November when it expected draft legislation to be released. A $1 bet limit also won the backing of influential anti-gambling campaigners and prominent academics, including Monash University's Charles Livingstone. ''The idea of moving to a $1 maximum bet is a very good option for minimising the harm of pokie-related problem gambling, and is supported by research funded by the gambling industry in 2001,'' Dr Livingstone said. ''Pre-commitment would also offer an effective harm-minimisation measure, but would be a more costly option.'' Dr Livingstone said punters would not notice the change and that technology required would be inexpensive, perhaps $500 to $1000 for each machine.

Victoria moved from a $10 maximum bet to $5 recently with no major problems or impost. The Victorian InterChurch Gambling Taskforce's Mark Zirnsak said the $1 bet option was simple and easy to understand. ''The only people who are going to be screaming are the pokie venues who want to make as money as possible,'' he said. The pokies lobby has targeted Labor MPs in marginal seats with personalised ads accusing them of ignoring their communities by supporting the reforms. MPs contacted by The Saturday Age said the campaign was ineffectual. Queensland MP Graham Perrett said for every negative comment his office received on the reforms, he received four supporting the government's work.