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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2000 Week 6 Hansard (24 May) . . Page.. 1730 ..

MS TUCKER (continuing):

committee inquiry was that this government does not have a full understanding of the problems associated with gambling opportunities. What is absolutely clear is that we cannot possibly say what the problems of this new emerging technology will be.

I also remind members of the recommendation of the select committee. Recommendation 28 states:

And at 4.91, in its summary of the issues, the committee said:

Despite claims from the minister that the ACT legislation is the best in the country, it is clear that our regime is still in development phase. The Interactive Gambling Act was established in 1998 with comments on all sides that it would need to be reviewed as the area was changing fast. I certainly made comments. I notice that Mr Humphries has put out a press release claiming I had changed my position. But it was quite clear from my position at that time that I acknowledged that this was emerging technology and would need to be reviewed and that we did not have enough information at that time. We certainly have more information now with the report of the Productivity Commission and particularly the Senate report on Internet gambling. This is significant new information that has come to us since our committee reported.

As I have said, the Gambling and Racing Commission has only just been established and it is apparent that there are issues in respect of the way it operates. In fact, we have chosen a model which is seen by the Productivity Commission to be less favourable because of the dual roles of the commission, and that may be something this Assembly will have to look at again.

The commission, which is assessing applications, is still developing instructions to applicants. I understand that it has lots of work to do yet on its code of conduct for the industry. I have been told this is about 12 months away. Let us remember that the Productivity Commission has described all Australian gambling laws as "deficient".

The Senate committee's recommendations on problem gambling, which is one of the social impacts with which the ACT committee was concerned, suggest a range of specific measures for a way to better regulate the industry. The Senate committee and the Productivity Commission are the best resources we currently have. We really owe it to the people who voted for us-those who are very likely to be concerned about gambling-to make the most of this and to instruct the gambling commission to investigate its regulatory regime, powers and resources in light of these reports, and that is what this motion is about.

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