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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1997 Week 13 Hansard (3 December) . . Page.. 4516 ..

MRS CARNELL (continuing):

Mr Speaker, there has also been a Northern Territory parliamentary select committee inquiry into the effects of poker machines on the community. The Victorian Government is about to release its report on a program of gambling research that involves the effects on retail outlets; the incidence of problem gambling, including the socioeconomic distribution of problem gamblers and community gambling patterns; a survey of participation levels in various forms of gambling; and also gambler profiles. Again, the list goes on. So, there is a lot of information out there. I suggest that the best way to go from here would be to ask our public servants to pull all of this information together, to also pull together the ACT demographics, the information that we have, and allow a new Assembly to determine the way forward from there, taking into account that the ACT does have a requirement to go down the path of a national competition policy review of gambling legislation.

Mr Speaker, in a nutshell, we will not support Mr Moore's Bill; we will support Ms Tucker's Bill; and we will not support either of the inquiries at this stage. But I hope that I have spelt out an approach that will make sure that all of the information is at the disposal of a new Assembly and also an inquiry that is set up to look at this whole, very difficult issue. I do not think there is any doubt that the clubs in the ACT do perform a vital function in many areas. I believe very strongly that our hotels and taverns do a good job as well. Mr Speaker, I do not think this is about who does the best job here. It is about community benefit, community impact and what is best for the whole Canberra society, not just for one group or one interest group versus another. This will be a challenge for a new Assembly. It is a decision that really has to be made; but it must be made based upon fact, based upon national competition policy and based upon what is best for Canberrans.

MR WHITECROSS (8.54): Mr Speaker, I rise to speak in this debate on behalf of my colleague Mr Berry, who is unfortunately unable to be with us tonight to represent the Labor Party in relation to this matter. Mr Speaker, we are conducting a cognate debate here in relation to four matters of private members business in relation to gaming. These matters have been on the notice paper for some time. Perhaps the number of items on the notice paper has just multiplied in the course of time as the debate in relation to gaming machines has developed.

Mr Speaker, back in April, when the last round of activity in relation to gaming occurred, the Labor Party indicated the position that we were going to adopt in respect of this matter. That position was that we believed that, before legislation currently before the Assembly to extend the availability of poker machines to hotels and taverns was passed, there should be a social and economic impact study commissioned and reviewed before consideration of further extensions. I put a motion on the notice paper to that effect. We also indicated that we believed that, in an attempt to lower the incidence of gambling-associated problems, licensed clubs in the ACT should adopt a self-regulating code of conduct and that any delay in doing so should result in enforcement through legislation. We also said that there ought to be a greater funding commitment by the ACT Government and licensed clubs to gambling support services to address clear service shortfalls.

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