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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2004 Week 02 Hansard (Tuesday, 2 March 2004) . . Page.. 592 ..

It is interesting, too, to reflect on the Gambling and Racing Commission review of the Gaming Machine Act last year that identified a number of harm minimisation activities which the government in its wisdom has chosen not to pursue. They include a recommendation to ensure automatic bank machines are not co-located with poker machines, for example, and that licence holders require relicensing every five years. This bill permits taverns and pubs to use class B poker machines, whereas until now they have been limited to class A machines, which have been essentially out of the market.

While the cap itself will not be increased through the passage of this bill, the number of venues in effect will be. A key recommendation of the 1999 Legislative Assembly report on the social and economic impacts of gambling in the ACT was that access to poker machines not be extended until research had been conducted on the current prevalence of problem gambling in the ACT, the relationship between problem gambling and the prevalence of poker machines, and the demographics of hotel customers compared to club members. Only some of that research has been conducted to date.

According to an answer to a question on notice that I put to the Treasurer in the annual reports and committee enquiries, the most recent research specifically on problem gambling conducted by the Australian Institute for Gambling Research estimated 1.9 per cent of Canberra’s adult population have a gambling problem. Research more broadly indicates that problem gambling is in part a function of the general level of gambling, and that a key factor in problem gambling, and indeed all gambling, lies in access. I also understand a project currently being conducted by the Australian National University Centre for Gambling Research about gambling machine accessibility and use in suburban Canberra, a detailed analysis of the Tuggeranong Valley, is already pointing at the importance of location to increase gambling. In other words, the nearer the machines are the more likely you are to gamble. Yet the government, with the enthusiastic support of the Liberal Party, is pushing on before this research project has reported, before any more detailed work on the links between problem gambling and increased access and visibility here in Canberra can be commissioned. Researchers have also made the point that there needs to be more work done in the ACT to understand problem gambling within different cultural groups. That work to my knowledge has not been commissioned, but the government are still pressing on with the bill.

Another interesting piece of research which would probably come too late in this process would be on the harm relating to class B machines as opposed to class C machines. The Labor government and the Liberals are allowing taverns and pubs to have access to class B machines, and I understand the argument is for class B rather than C because they are interested in reducing harm associated with the use of those machines. It seems perfectly reasonable then to support the proposal that, if the government and the opposition are so interested in equity, we should make sure that it is class B machines that go to the clubs as well. But that idea does not seem to be getting much support.

I received a letter last year from Marie Bennett from Lifeline, calling on me to oppose this legislation, and I will read some of the letter into the record for the benefit of members:

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