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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2004 Week 06 Hansard (Thursday, 24 June 2004) . . Page.. 2699 ..

Question put:

That Mrs Cross’s amendment be agreed to.

The Assembly voted—

Question so resolved in the affirmative.

Clause 165, as amended, agreed to.

Motion (by Ms Dundas, by leave) agreed to:

That clause 165 be reconsidered.

Clause 165—reconsideration.

MS DUNDAS (8.20): I move amendment No 19 circulated in my name [see schedule 2 at page 2756].

Mr Speaker, I have already put forward the arguments. I think it is important that, where there is a poker machine, the community contribution on that poker machine should be the same, irrespective of the location of that poker machine.

MR STEFANIAK (8.20): Mr Speaker, the opposition will not be supporting this amendment as there is a very big difference between clubs and other entities, which has now been clarified for most people in the Assembly. Basically, a club is a community organisation that is meant to churn its profits back into the community. Hotels and taverns are commercial, private enterprises and that is why, in the tax regime, they pay more tax. They pay a much higher rate of tax.

There might have been a bit of confusion about this because the hotels that have 10 class B machines do make contributions to the community, but they do that through choice, probably to get custom and for reasons like that. They have been included in some of the publications so I can see where the confusion arose. However, fundamentally, hotels and taverns are private bodies and, while they do support local entities, they do so by choice and they pay a much higher rate of tax than clubs. We will not be supporting this amendment.

Question put:

That Ms Dundas’s amendment be agreed to.

The Assembly voted—

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