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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2004 Week 02 Hansard (Tuesday, 2 March 2004) . . Page.. 594 ..

I am pleased for the support of the initiative in relation to women’s sport. It is something that I went to the last election with and I would say that it has had modest success but we still have a way to go. The government has on other fronts moved to support women’s sport and to ensure that it is treated equally in terms of grants and support given. That has not always been the case.

The bill requires that applications for gaming machines must be accompanied by a social impact assessment. That is a genuine provision and that provision will be applied. We will not be supporting the mobility provisions in Mr Stefaniak’s bill. I cannot imagine towing these things around on the back of a trailer and deciding which night is a good night to go where. I think that part might need a little bit of work. I would like to think that when a poker machine licence is given and a social impact statement has been provided to support that, it is provided to a location. I do not even agree with a club that has two or three outlets being able to transfer a machine between those areas, because that would advantage three connected establishments over three separate independent establishments, possibly otherwise in the same situation. We need an even playing field.

I thank members for the support, such as it is, and we will accept Mr Stefaniak’s first amendment, which, I think, at this stage brings in only one premise; we missed one and that was purely an oversight. The new definition is just a little bit more comprehensive and does what we intended. But we cannot accept the other change.

Question resolved in the affirmative.

Bill agreed to in principle.

Detail stage

Clauses 1 to 11, by leave, taken together and agreed to.

Clause 12.

MS TUCKER (12.34 am): I will be opposing this clause for the reasons I have already stated.

MR STEFANIAK (12.34 am): I move amendment No 1 circulated in my name [see schedule 6 at page 606]. As has already been discussed, this amendment enables both on licences for taverns and off licences, hotels that either have fewer than 12 residential rooms or no rooms, to have access to two class B gaming machines.

MS TUCKER (11.34 am): I will not be supporting this amendment either, for the reasons I have already stated.

Question put:

That the amendment (Mr Stefaniak’s) be agreed to.

The Assembly voted—

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