Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1997 Week 5 Hansard (15 May) . . Page.. 1476 ..

Debate resumed from 8 May 1997, on motion by Mrs Carnell:

That this Bill be agreed to in principle.

MR WHITECROSS (Leader of the Opposition) (12.16): Mr Speaker, the Opposition will be supporting this Bill. The intention of the Bill is to update the Act so that, instead of referring to people "of good fame and character", it puts a more objective test on that, in terms of having been convicted of an offence involving fraud or dishonesty, an offence involving unlawful gambling, an offence against a tax law of the ACT, or an offence against the Gaming Machine Act. Mr Speaker, I think that the approach being proposed by the Government is a good one. The approach also extends the test of bona fides to cover directors and influential persons in clubs, not simply the actual holder of the licence. I think that these are appropriate changes to the law, Mr Speaker.

I have two concerns in relation to this legislation. The first is just a matter of general principle. There is some indication that the law is being changed because of an application currently before the commissioner, where the commissioner is concerned about the issuing of the licence and wants to change the law. It should always be a matter of some concern to a parliament where a law is being changed part way through a process in order to create a law which will assist a person in considering an application that is already before that person.

Mr Speaker, the other matter of some concern to me is that the period during which relevant offences are taken into account is five years. That means that, if someone has been convicted of offences relating to unlawful gaming, say, 10 years ago, the commissioner cannot take account of that in issuing a gaming machine licence; or, if they have been convicted of offences against the Gaming Machine Act itself more than five years ago, that cannot be taken into account in deciding whether to issue a gaming machine licence. That seems to be slightly different from some other laws, say, in relation to bookmakers or auctioneers.

Mr Speaker, I have been advised that this reflects current practice and the provisions of the Crimes Act in relation to taking into account prior convictions. On that basis, I am happy to go with the legislation as it exists. But I think that is something that we should just note - that people who have prior convictions for unlawful gaming or convictions under the Gaming Machine Act itself could, under these provisions, obtain a gaming machine licence, whereas they might not obtain one under the good fame and character test. Someone, for instance, who had operated an illegal casino might not have passed the good fame and character test, but under this test they may well pass, if those convictions date back more than five years. Mr Speaker, on balance, the Opposition will be supporting the Government's legislation.

MR MOORE (12.20): Mr Speaker, in rising to support this legislation, I would like to start by asking a question of the Chief Minister. Chief Minister, my understanding is that when you introduce legislation like this, which is amending another piece of legislation, it automatically kicks in a requirement under our national competition policy, to which you committed the ACT Government - - -

Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .