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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2004 Week 06 Hansard (Thursday, 24 June 2004) . . Page.. 2688 ..

MR STEFANIAK (5.54): I make the same points on this clause. I oppose this clause as well, Mr Speaker, and I rely on what I said earlier.

MR QUINLAN (Treasurer, Minister for Economic Development, Business and Tourism, and Minister for Sport, Racing and Gaming) (5.55): I move amendment No 4 circulated in my name [see schedule 3 at page 2761].

This amendment is just tightening up the grammar within the bill.

Amendment agreed to.

Clause 67, as amended, agreed to.

Clause 68 agreed to.

Clause 69.

MS TUCKER (5.57): I move amendment No 6 circulated in my name [see schedule 8 at page 2764].

Clause 69 establishes the basis for the commission to monitor and allow or not allow the introduction of new types of gaming machines and new peripheral equipment. Note acceptors are an example of peripheral equipment. The commission would signify its approval of such equipment by a notifiable instrument. The clause requires the commission to consider what is, essentially, a reputable technical evaluation of the new equipment.

My amendment adds to that required assessment by requiring the commission also to consider any available research on the consumer protection and harm minimisation implications of the gaming machine or peripheral equipment proposed to be approved. This is important because such technologies are not neutral in the effect they have on the gaming experience and hence on the risk of people spending much more than they should and thereby harming themselves, their families and so on.

This amendment on its own simply adds to the statutory requirements for the commission’s consideration. It does not add any other scrutineers to the process of checking the equipment we are bringing in; it just gives effect, essentially, to the commission’s obligation to conduct its activities with consideration for consumer protection, which I remind members is one of the objectives of the act. I think that it is a simple and sensible amendment.

Amendment agreed to.

MS TUCKER (5.58): I move amendment No 7 circulated in my name [see schedule 8 at page 2764].

This amendment seeks to change the notifiable instrument approving new types of gaming machines or new peripheral equipment to a disallowable instrument in the form of an allowable instrument. I think that I have put the case for having some Assembly

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