Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .
Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2000 Week 4 Hansard (30 March) . . Page.. 1167 ..
Motion (by Ms Tucker ) agreed to, with the concurrence of an absolute majority:
That so much of the standing and temporary orders be suspended as would prevent the order of the day, Assembly business relating to the disallowance of a provision of Instrument No. 55 of 2000, being called on forthwith.
Debate resumed.
MR QUINLAN (4.08): The Opposition will support Ms Tucker's motion. We do not accept much of what has been said. We do not accept that there will be a rampant expansion of gambling just because the number of licences increases. We do accept what the Treasurer has said in relation to the value of licences and we do not want to see them inflated and become a traded commodity or a scarce commodity. At the same time, we do want to see that the newly formed commission, in which we have confidence, has a chance to look through the controls and processes that exist and the protection mechanisms that are included. We would like to hear from them in relation to that before we rubber-stamp having virtually unlimited licences. We understand the difference between sports betting and Internet betting, but I would still like to hear from the commission whether that line is becoming blurred. Can we keep a clear distinction on that - - -
Mr Humphries: They have not been asked to comment.
MR QUINLAN: They have not?
Mr Humphries: No. No-one has asked them to comment.
MR QUINLAN: We are hoping that they will be, Mr Humphries. We are hoping that they will be and that they will come back to us and say, "We are satisfied with the probity processes which are set down and which we will apply. We are satisfied with the public safety and public protection mechanisms that exist", and simply no more than that. I do believe that it will not be a long time before this particular ceiling on sports betting licences is removed, but I would like to think that the newly formed commission has had a thorough look at the procedures around it and can report to this Assembly that it is satisfied with the mechanisms that are available to it and the powers that it has in terms of control before we actually take that final step.
We will be supporting the motion, but I want to make it clear that we would not support an indefinite continuation of a ceiling on sports betting. I think that would have some downside effects as well - not just the economic ones but also, as I said, we do not want to turn them into a valuable commodity and have people trading in them. We would just
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .