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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2001 Week 9 Hansard (22 August) . . Page.. 3196 ..

MR BERRY (continuing):

We appreciate it is a catch 22-ie not many use the clubs at these times so why not shut it down in case there are a few problem gamblers.

Nice point, I think. The letter continued:

Our response is that why should the majority of users be penalised at the expense of a very small number of possible problem gamblers, who may or may not use the facilities at this time.

In particular, if the members who currently use the clubs at those times react to the reduced trading hours by not attending their club in the hours leading up to the restricted trading hours, then already marginal operations will become unsustainable because of the high staff costs that are involved. As a consequence the affected clubs will close for the whole of these shifts rather than remain open for part of those shifts. The effect of this will be that the clubs will cease 24 hour trading and staff will lose jobs. While the reduced trading hours may give gamblers a break it will be disproportionately high cost to club staff.

The extent of job losses will depend on the reactions of the affected club patrons. At this stage we estimate that there will be a reduction in eight hour shifts and that between 40-50 permanent and casual duty managers/supervisors, bar staff and security staff could lose their jobs. The reduced trading hours will reduce the overall safety in the areas in which the clubs are located and will increase the security risk for the individual clubs.

We continue to hold to the view that the proposed changes contained in this Bill will not achieve its stated objective. It will significantly affect up to 50 club staff and those club members who choose/have to work shift work and enjoy their club facilities at a time convenient to them.

We therefore again urge the Government, the Opposition and the independent members of the Legislative Assembly-

they left you out, Kerrie, but I will include the Greens-

to postpone consideration of this issue and to examine it as part of the holistic review, which is currently in train.

Mr Speaker, there are a few things that I have to deal with. Mr Moore came up with his usual tirade against the Labor Party. We have come to expect that from an anti-Labor person. If it were not the clubs, Mr Moore would find some other reason to berate the Labor Party, which he hates because of its strength in the community. Mr Moore dislikes the Labor Party because it has been in existence for 100 years. It will be here a long time after he has gone. So let us brush that one aside because it is not relevant to the debate at all.

If you took Mr Moore's suggestions to the extreme, we would not be able to vote on roads in this place because we use them; we would not be able to vote on rates because we pay them; and we would not be able to turn our heaters on at home because we voted on such measures. The logic is just beyond belief.

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