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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2004 Week 06 Hansard (Thursday, 24 June 2004) . . Page.. 2698 ..

taverns have been allowed to access class B poker machines. I also note that a number of hotels currently hold class B machines and they are not required to make a community contribution.

I am at a loss to understand why this differentiation exists, especially as the government has made such a big deal about the importance of gaming machine revenues that go towards different communities. This amendment, along with some other consequential amendments, addresses this issue and ensures that all licensees, regardless of whether or not they are clubs, are required to pay the same level of community contributions. I think that is only fair. I do not understand why somebody who has a poker machine in this type of venue can get away without paying a community contribution, but somebody who has a poker machine in a club has to pay a community contribution. I think it would be fairer if everybody contributed.

Question put:

That amendment No 19 be agreed to.

Question resolved in the negative.

Amendment No 20, by leave, withdrawn.

MRS CROSS (8.12): I move amendment No 1 circulated in my name [see schedule 5 at page 2763].

Mr Speaker, this amendment reinserts into the Gaming Machine Act a provision that exists in the current act requiring licensees to report the total value of contributions to registered parties and associated entities in their yearly financial reports.

It is quite reasonable to expect that any licensee who contributes to a political party or an associated entity should record these in their yearly financial reports. This would enhance the transparency of not only licensees but also the electoral process. Ensuring electoral transparency is important, and knowing who gave what to whom is also important. This amendment ensures this will be the case. This clause was an amendment to the previous act and should remain as such. I commend the amendment to the Assembly.

MR QUINLAN (Treasurer, Minister for Economic Development, Business and Tourism, and Minister for Sport, Racing and Gaming) (8.13): The government will not be accepting this amendment, Mr Speaker. If this is a laudable objective, then it should be part of the Electoral Act. The Electoral Act covers disclosure of contributions. I do not see why we should start this stupid process of duplicating legislation on what are really emotive grounds rather than practical grounds. There is a process for the reporting of political contributions that covers everybody. Why shouldn’t everybody—pubs, businesses, individuals—be treated equally? This is totally redundant.

MR STEFANIAK (8.13): It might be a bit of doubling up, but I think we report already, and it is reported to the Assembly, how the community contributions are divvied up and the value of them. We do not see any harm in this and we will support it.

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