Page 4978 - Week 17 - Tuesday, 11 December 1990
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
Mr Speaker, I am also not convinced, with regard to the Bills that we have before us, that the Government has proposed any good reasons why it would want to abolish the Gaming and Liquor Authority. The Gaming and Liquor Authority, or GALA as it is usually known, has provided a very effective instrument for the administration of gaming and liquor functions in the ACT. It has done so over many years. The question of course is: why does it need to change? We have not heard much from the Government on that subject. Gaming and liquor administration in the ACT has not been subject to the kind of corruption and allegations that have happened in other States - allegations of fraud and allegations of all kinds of misfeasance. That just has not happened here. I think that we can give most of the credit for that to GALA.
It has also, of course, been a very important source of revenue for the ACT. If we have a look at how important it has been in that area, we get a little bit to the heart of why the Government now wants to abolish it. I refer members to the Priorities Review Board report, which Mr Kaine claims is not his agenda. Of course, in relation to GALA, this is the PRB at work. The PRB have recognised that GALA is a very efficient and very lucrative function. Of course, what Mr Kaine is now proposing to do with it is, in fact, exactly what the PRB recommended that he do with it. The PRB have recommended that GALA be re-established as either an authority or a Territory owned corporation, and surprise, surprise; here it is happening.
Mr Collaery: What page?
MS FOLLETT: Page 124. They go on to say that the newly established corporation should have a restructured board of up to seven people - surprise, surprise; that it establish or sponsor a representative racing forum - I think we have something about that before us right now; and that regulatory processes, including statutory requirements, should be reviewed and streamlined. Again, I think Mr Kaine is doing exactly as his PRB masters would wish.
Any suggestion that the PRB report is not this Government's agenda is absolute rubbish, because here we have an example of just how closely Mr Kaine wishes to follow the Priorities Review Board agenda. In my view, the Bills that we have before us suffer from all of the problems that the original Territory Owned Corporations Bill suffered from. Further, there is no real reason why we should be dealing with these Bills at all. Nobody has told me what is wrong with GALA. Nobody has told me why you would want such a lucrative body to be altered.
Mr Berry: Is it broken?
MS FOLLETT: As Mr Berry says, "If it ain't broke, why fix it?". Mr Kaine's answer would be, "Because the PRB said so". They are, as I said, his masters.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .