Page 2877 - Week 10 - Thursday, 15 August 1991
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
Anyway, by removing that requirement for the upper limit, the problem then identified was: What would happen if one club had one level and somebody else had another one; and within that club itself what are they doing? Are there going to be certain machines tucked away round the corner, directors' specials, so to speak, that perhaps would be set at 99 per cent, but the ones the poor punters out in the general area of the club will be playing might be set at 87 per cent? As a result of that, it was determined that the rate of return for each class and type of machine within a particular premises should be identical right throughout the club so that there could not be any suggestion of, for example, a directors' special known only to certain members.
In New South Wales, I believe, the rate of return on each machine within a club is solely at the discretion of the manager or the board of management and, as we all know, there is no statement on the machines to let the consumer know the rate of return on that machine. Whilst I am not suggesting that there are any improprieties occurring within reputable clubs in New South Wales, I think that is an unsatisfactory state of affairs. Under the system that this legislation will be bringing in, each machine will be labelled with the appropriate rate of return so that the person using the machine will know that they can expect 87 per cent or 92 per cent, or whatever the rate may be.
I am not anticipating a great variation in the vast majority of machines in the ACT. The vast majority of those are 10c and 20c machines. I believe that even in New South Wales those levels have been set. The industry standard is usually defined as 87 per cent. Of course, there would be little requirement for clubs to vary that rate of return. But, in terms of the $1 and $2 machines, levels of investment can become quite substantial. I think this is an appropriate piece of legislation. It provides a far better rate of return to the consumer anyway and, of course, that applies right across the board. We have raised the minimum return to at least 85 per cent now.
Mr Speaker, I support this legislation. The fact that the rate must be the same for each denomination and class does not imply, for example, that draw poker machines have to be set at exactly the same rate as reel machines, if that is the word. The class Bs and class Cs may well have different rates of return within the club and that might well meet the specific requirements of that club constituency. But, at least, if a person chooses to play a particular class they will know that the rate of return will be the same throughout the club for that particular class of machine.
This will provide for entrepreneurial activity, I believe. I think that at the end of the day the consumer is going to get a better deal out of this. Within the club industry itself, which, as I have said, is so important, it will
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .