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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2000 Week 12 Hansard (5 December) . . Page.. 3699 ..

MR BERRY: Mr Speaker, if you have a look at the list of the contributions to the Labor Party, you will see that I made a substantial one myself, as did many of my colleagues, and this adds up to a substantial amount. Somebody said it was the lowest period in this place. Well, that may be so, but this level of hypocrisy!

I can accept that the government would go down this course, but they cannot do it without support. What troubles me about this is the level of support that has been given to this government on the principle of disclosure, when some important issues are not being disclosed. I point to that one because it is clear that nothing was given to the Labor Party. The casino did not get its poker machines, and we stuck with the original agreement for a review after 20 years or whatever it was.

But the Liberals, even though they had supported the original arrangement with Casino Canberra, and had promised at a previous election that there would be no change for the clubs, all of a sudden get $15,000 and then allow poker machines in Casino Canberra. It speaks for itself. I do not have to say any more - it speaks volumes.

MR HUMPHRIES (Chief Minister, Minister for Community Affairs, Attorney - General and Treasurer) (8.57): I would like to take up a few of the issues that Mr Berry has raised and some others. Let me say first of all that the Liberal Party supports the amendment that Mr Moore has put forward. It was not part of the bill that I originally presented to the Assembly. Mr Moore raised it for the first time a few days ago with me. I put it to the Liberal Party room this morning and there was agreement to it.

Mr Quinlan might find that hard to believe, but the fact is that there was an issue and a debate about it, and the view was taken that this was appropriate. I think that the one thing the Labor Party has failed to understand about this debate and the comparisons they keep making with donations from business and others to political parties, is that there is a difference between the source of money in one case and the source of money in the other.

Nobody provides monopolies or privileges to business, at least for the most part, to generate profits that in turn are given to political parties. In the case of the poker machines, there is, as members have acknowledged, a very significant privilege, a very lucrative monopoly, which does provide considerable benefits to the particular organisations within the community that receive the takings from those machines. The community has a legitimate interest in what happens to that money.

Mr Berry says that the Liberal Party has taken the position in recent days that it will support poker machines in the casino, and it received a donation from the casino at the last election, therefore the party must have been bought off. I would like to respond to that by actually citing a situation that occurred a few years ago in this Assembly, where the boot was on the other foot. There was a debate in this place - several debates in fact - about X - rated videos, and the Labor Party at that time vigorously argued to allow the continuing sale of X - rated videos in the ACT.

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