Page 3120 - Week 09 - Thursday, 13 October 2022
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
I note Mr Parton’s comments on that. There is obviously a whole debate to be had about how this progresses. What I can assure Mr Parton, and the community more broadly, is that the government does have an ongoing relationship and a lot of discussion with, and will be continuing consultation with, the club sector and harm reduction advocates about how we progress this reform. We have been very open about it. We put out a discussion paper early in the process, and I have been very clear about this. It was a discussion that said, “The government went out and got independent advice. We have been advised that this is the best pathway forward.
Before we completely design it, we want to get feedback.” That is genuine consultation. We did not spend six months honing a final proposal. We said, “This is the advice we have received. We want to test it with you.”
We have had a broad spectrum of feedback, as you might anticipate. The government is now in the process of establishing a technical working group which will have nominees from both the clubs and the Gaming Technologies Association, who represent the manufacturers of machines, so that we can actually get down to the technological minutiae of this reform. That is ultimately what it is going to be about. There is a lot of technical detail—the software capability of machines, wiring networks in clubs, gaming protocols and all these sorts of questions which require really detailed discussion. That is what the government is now engaging on with the sector to further refine the proposition and determine the next steps.
I can assure this house and Mr Parton, who I know has a particular interest in this, that that consultation is continuing. The government continue to listen to a range of stakeholders in this space as we seek to move forward on minimising harm in the ACT whilst making sure that our clubs continue to be viable and important social hubs in our community.
Turning to other questions that have been raised in the debate tonight, I want to provide information to members where they have raised issues. Mr Cain flagged the issue of the quality of recordings in the court, from the letters he and I received from a constituent. He did make the response that the constituent had received no response from the Attorney-General’s office. I can assure the house that that is not the case. I do not have the date in front of me, but I have responded in writing to that constituent with a detailed answer which sought to address the questions that that constituent raised. I am happy to provide more details to Mr Cain about that if he wants to get back to me.
Unfortunately, the shadow attorney-general was not able to stay for the full discussion of the Justice and Community Safety Directorate tonight, but, if he is listening or he reads the Hansard later, I am happy to have a discussion with him about that matter.
I will briefly reflect on the comments that Mr Hanson made about ACT Policing and this government’s support—or, in his view, otherwise—for ACT Policing. Mr Gentleman is absent today. I will not speak on his behalf per se, but what I will say, as a member of this government and as the Attorney-General, is that the ACT government has enormous respect for our police service. It is unclear to me whether Mr Hanson was born a polariser or whether he has practised it. He certainly relishes it.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video