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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2000 Week 12 Hansard (5 December) . . Page.. 3606 ..

MS CARNELL (continuing):

not happening but this legislation will make sure that we can see where it is going, that we can have the information we need and that the community, the beneficiaries of these clubs and of poker machines, is given the opportunity to see in a transparent way where the money is going. Poker machines do have a social harm; let us see the social benefit.

MR STEFANIAK (Minister for Education and Minister Assisting the Attorney - General) (11.13): Mr Speaker, I am going to confine my remarks to the sporting activities of clubs. A lot of what Mr Quinlan said about sporting activities would have been correct 12 months ago because there were some problems with the initial legislation. The government recognised this and the Treasurer brought in new legislation to the Assembly to amend the act and counter the problems.

There was a different set of community contributions in the original legislation - 2 per cent, I think, in the first year to sport or associated things and 3 per cent to various charities. There was no juxtaposition between the two, and that rose to 21/2 per cent and 5 per cent, respectively, after three years. That would have caused problems for a large number of our clubs, which provide immense support to the sporting community, in that most of their excess money goes towards assisting sporting clubs in their areas.

Other clubs, of course, would not necessarily have been affected or they might have been affected to a lesser extent. Invariably they would have spent their money on charitable things because they do not necessarily support sport to the same extent as do sporting clubs.

What we have on the table now recognises the justifiable genuine concerns of clubs, especially sporting clubs. I think all members would have been lobbied on that. I certainly was and I was very happy to go and see my colleagues about it. I am delighted with proposed new section 60B(1) on page 6 of the bill. Proposed new section 60B(1), which deals with approval of community contributions, states:

That is basically commonsense. If a club wants to give all of its 5 per cent, rising now to 7 per cent, to charities, it can do so. If it wants to give all of that 5 per cent, rising to 7 per cent, to sporting activities in the community, it can do so. I assume, too, that if it wants to have a little bit of a mix, it can do that as well. That is eminently sensible, and I do not think too many organisations now have a real problem with that. What that does is protect the legitimate interests of amateur sport and the various sporting bodies that receive very significant assistance from the clubs in this territory. I refer to the little organisations, the little sporting groups, that would really be doing it tough were it not for the assistance they receive. The legislation will enable this to continue.

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