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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1997 Week 13 Hansard (3 December) . . Page.. 4525 ..

MR MOORE (continuing):

I still believe, appropriately, under the Inquiries Act; but it could be otherwise - should prepare a comprehensive report on the state of gambling in the ACT. The two proposed inquiries - Mr Whitecross's inquiry and Ms Tucker's inquiry - should be combined. I think there are very positive features in the two of them. I think they can easily be combined. There is some overlap. That would ensure a very wide-ranging inquiry.

It seems to me, Mr Speaker, that all gaming machine licences ought to include a condition requiring one per cent of gambling turnover to be levied for a gambling redress fund, to apply to adverse social effects and expenses on the public purse arising out of the operation of gambling in the community. I think research into gambling counselling and crisis service related activities could also be funded in this way. Mr Speaker, I believe that an application of a regime like this to clubs ought not to be sudden, because it would clearly be an extra burden; but it could be levied gradually, to ensure that we do not put any business or any job at risk.

Mr Speaker, it seems to me that we should also look at fair trading. I am disappointed that the Minister for Fair Trading is not here at the moment; but I am sure that he is listening in his office. The Assembly should enact legislative change to remove discrimination amongst business organisations which may operate gaming machines. My legislation, of course, is designed to do that. It seems to me, Mr Speaker, that licensees should pay an administrative fee and other fees as well. We should also see transparency in the use of gaming profits. I think that, at the moment, clubs often subsidise other activities with gaming profits. Whilst on many occasions that is done in a socially responsible way - and I have described some of those - there are cases that I am aware of where that is not so.

Mr Speaker, finally, I would like to say that I am an advocate of ensuring that our taxation regime is at least equivalent to that of New South Wales. The extra revenue that we get there can be used in very sensible ways. I will add that to my list of revenue measures that I believe are entirely appropriate, along with the bed tax, of which I am an advocate. The two combined will give approximately $10m. Only today the Chief Minister was talking about a $150m operating loss. Ten million dollars off that operating loss is yet another step to improving our financial outcomes in this Territory.

I must say, Mr Speaker, that my preference would be to use the money for what I consider to be some worthwhile issues, such as education and health. These are complex issues. I believe that there are some issues that members, particularly members of parties, have to be very careful of, in the way they consider these particular issues. It raises a Pandora's box of questions about how we, as a community, fund election campaigns and how we fund political parties. Mr Speaker, I commend the legislation.

MR WHITECROSS (9.33): Mr Speaker, before I start, can you clarify whether Mr Moore has just closed the debate, given that this is his Bill.

MR SPEAKER: Yes. It is a cognate debate, but we will be dealing with each one in turn, Mr Whitecross.

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