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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2002 Week 7 Hansard (4 June) . . Page.. 1873 ..

MR HUMPHRIES (Leader of the Opposition) (5.15). Mr Speaker, I move the amendment circulated in my name to the amendment of Ms Dundas. It simply changes the sunset clause from 1 July 2003 to 1 July 2004 [see schedule 1 at page 1895].

It seems to me that the review currently being talked about is not the appropriate vehicle for assessing whether or not these amendment to the Gaming Machine Act ought, or ought not, to continue.

The review is already substantially completed. I understand the review will be reporting on possible changes to the Gaming Machine Act some time in the next few months. I doubt that it is going to be able, in any valuable way, to assess the effect of these amendments passed today. They do not come into operation until 1 July. I suspect they will not have any significant effect, and there will be no empirical evidence about their effect on women's sport or whatever, before the report is due to be delivered to this place, so I think it is wrong to link these two matters.

However, a reporting date in a sunset clause of 1 July 2004 means that the Assembly can see the operation of this new legislation for the period of a year. It will have the report of the Gambling and Racing Commission on the effect of this amendment for its first year of operation. Then, in light of that information, we will be able to have a debate some time-presumably in early 2004, before the operation of the sunset clause-to decide whether the provisions should or should not continue.

MS TUCKER (5.17): Ms Dundas is trying to insert a sunset clause, and I notice Mr Humphries wants to extend the time. The aim is to ensure that this is a trial. Because we do not have any clear data at the moment, we will look at the results of this change after a period of time and evaluate it on the basis of further information.

I will support this amendment. However, I note that, without baseline data, it is a problem. Without data on which forms of women's sports and activities are getting what money now from clubs, it will be very difficult to assess the results of this new scheme. Therefore, I strongly encourage the government to do the work now, to find out where the money is spent-including mixed sports-to expand women's participation, women-specific teams and so on.

MS DUNDAS (5.18): I cannot support Mr Humphries' amendment to my amendment. Even though I take on board his points, we must consider these new amendments to the Gaming Machine Act in the context of the outcomes of the review, even if these new amendments cannot be specifically considered by the review.

The review being undertaken is a very wide, sweeping review of everything to do with the Gaming Machine Act and this is an amendment to that act. When we have the outcomes of the review and are looking at implementing them, we cannot ignore this new regime that we have inserted underneath the review while it is going on.

The gaming machine cap finishes on 30 June 2003. Putting in a sunset clause with the same date means we have a clearer understanding of the dates that are important for the gaming review, and that we can consider it all at once. That is why I cannot support the opposition's amendment.

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