Page 925 - Week 06 - Wednesday, 26 July 1989
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
and the implications from the operation of other casinos in Australia on the proposed Canberra casino.
These terms of reference boiled down to two central issues: Firstly, should the ACT have a casino and, secondly, should the casino be located on section 19? The answer to both of those questions is a guarded yes. Permit me, Mr Speaker, to outline some of the essential conclusions and recommendations of the report.
There was considerable debate before the committee about the veracity of various means of probing opinions of Canberra citizens on the subject of a casino. Some groups, in particular the Committee for a Casino-Free Canberra, were keen to discredit various surveys purporting to show that a majority of Canberrans were at least not ill-disposed to the establishment of a casino here. Notable among these surveys was a survey conducted by the Canberra Association for Regional Development, the opinion poll conducted on behalf of Channel 10 in December 1988, and the opinion polling done by the Caldwell inquiry.
Although reservations were expressed by members of the committee regarding all three of these polls, the committee did note that the general thrust of generally properly conducted inquiries has always been that a majority of people favour the establishment of a casino in Canberra.
Taken together, the various surveys are so similar that the committee was compelled to the conclusion that they represent, broadly speaking, the views of the community. The point was, of course, well made that the depth of opinion on each side of the issue does vary considerably, however. In my opinion, the depth of opinion opposing the casino is somewhat deeper than the conviction of those favouring its construction. It is perhaps a flaw of democracy that it gives to a conviction a person is prepared to die for the same weight as to an opinion held merely on the balance of probabilities.
I do not believe, however, that the committee would have supported the concept of a casino in Canberra if it were not convinced, irrespective of the views of the majority of electors, that the benefits of a casino would outweigh its disadvantages. In this respect, it was of course measuring chalk against cheese, and the issue vexed our minds for quite some time.
It was pointed out, and the committee accepted without reservation, that the existence of a casino in Canberra will increase gambling overall in the Territory; will increase the particular problems of excessive gamblers; will accelerate the problems experienced by the families of excessive gamblers; and will necessitate some additional burden on those social welfare organisations which provide assistance to victims of excessive gambling. That evidence was not disputed by any member of the committee.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .