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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2004 Week 06 Hansard (Thursday, 24 June 2004) . . Page.. 2683 ..

Mr Quinlan: I don’t have a great problem with it, Bill. It is just that it is inconsistent with the way we handle disallowable instruments.

MR STEFANIAK: Unless there is some pressing problem with that, I am inclined to support the amendment at least to see how it works. It seems to me to be a reasonably sensible suggestion. I do not think that, on the face of it, it is going to cause too much angst to anyone. We will certainly be supporting amendment No 3. I am not quite sure what Ms Tucker is trying to aim at in amendment No 4, or whether it is just consequential upon something, but we will support amendment No 3.

MS DUNDAS (5.34): I am quite happy to support these amendments. There are some questions to be asked about the next clause that Ms Tucker is proposing but, if we are going to have a cap, ensuring that it actually exists as a cap is a very important argument. I am particularly pleased to see amendment No 3 and to hear Mr Stefaniak say he is willing to consider supporting this amendment.

The Treasurer has asked us to have faith in how the commission will issue licences. I do think that the commission does a very good job in how it manages these things, but under clause 12 the commission must issue a licence to the applicant if a series of requirements is met. It does not have a choice; it is a must. There are some grounds for the commission to refuse an initial licence application, but they are all in relation to how a club is managed and decisions of that club in terms of its rent.

If the cap is increased by a disallowable instrument, the commission might not have any choice but to issue the machines. That is why I have so many concerns about how that cap, as regulated by a disallowable instrument, will function. Having it as an allowable disallowable instrument, as Ms Tucker has proposed, gets around that problem. So I hope that this amendment will be supported by the Assembly today. I had hoped that it would support my amendment, but we cannot have everything. I hope that this amendment will be supported so that we will not end up in a situation where the commission is forced to give out a machine and then the Assembly has to have a debate about whether that was the right thing to do.

Ordered that the amendments be divided.

Question put:

That amendment No 2 be agreed to.

Question resolved in the negative.

Question put:

That amendment No 3 be agreed to.

Question resolved in the affirmative.

Question put:

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