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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2000 Week 12 Hansard (5 December) . . Page.. 3613 ..

MR MOORE (continuing):

Yet members in this Assembly are still voting on an issue I believe they ought not to vote on but step aside from. That is a belief that I have held for quite a number of years and raised in this place a number of times and with individual members. There is a special privilege associated with poker machines. There is a special nest egg for the Labor Party. The Canberra Times had it absolutely right.

If members have not read that editorial, I think it is well worth their doing so, because it clearly explained what ought to happen. We did not need that editorial to tell us. Mr Osborne, when he was getting some advantage from a particular club, demonstrated the right way to act. He stood aside from any vote on the matter in the Assembly. Now that time has passed, so Mr Osborne is now free to vote on these issues. But for somebody going to the next election with the advantage of over a million dollars from poker machines coming into their party, that is something that ought to be considered very carefully.

That is not to say there ought not to be donations to political parties. I accept donations to political parties. I accept that the Labor Club can make donations to the Labor Party. That is part of their reason for being. I do not think any of us have a particular problem with that. But we have a problem if that undermines the original intention of poker machines, which was to ensure that the community gets an adequate return from the very special privilege we give to clubs. I repeat that with quite a number of clubs this already happens. But the report tabled by Mr Humphries the other day showed that it does not happen in all cases.

I have another concern that I seek to address in the amendments I have circulated. When a club donates a significant sum of its money to a political party, those in the community who are most needy - charitable organisations such as the Smith Family and others - miss out. There is a very easy way for us to ensure that they do not miss out. Where a donation is made to a political party, then an equivalent donation should be made to a charitable organisation as well. That is a very sensible way of dealing with a privileged position. The other way of dealing with it is for us to say, "Let us do away with this special privilege altogether. Let anybody who wishes to have poker machines apply for them." We could still keep a cap on the number but allow them to be in casinos and hotels. I am not suggesting that.

Mr Quinlan: Has Mr Moore moved an amendment?

MR SPEAKER: No, he has not. We are discussing the bill in principle.

Mr Quinlan: I just thought he might discuss the bill in principle. He will want to talk again on his amendment.

MR MOORE: I take Mr Quinlan's point of order.

MR SPEAKER: No, there is no point of order.

MR MOORE: In talking at the in - principle stage, I have referred to the amendment I have circulated in my name.

Mr Quinlan: So you are not going to speak to it later then?

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