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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2004 Week 06 Hansard (Thursday, 24 June 2004) . . Page.. 2706 ..

The Assembly voted—

Question so resolved in the negative.

MS DUNDAS (8.51): I move amendment No 1 circulated in my name on the blue sheet [see schedule 6 at page 2763].

This amendment goes to the issue of increasing the levels of community contributions. When the recording of compulsory community contributions first came into effect, there was a requirement that the percentage increased each year by one per cent. This raised the initial contribution of five per cent up to the level of seven per cent, where it is now. This amendment proposes to continue the policy of increasing community contributions over the next few years up to a level of 10 per cent. I note that this is below what the actual level of community contributions across the sector is: I understand that it is currently at about 13 per cent.

Many clubs do give far in excess of the statutory minimum, and I congratulate those clubs for the support that they give to this community. This amendment will not affect them in any way. However, there are some other clubs that just meet the legislative minimum and refuse to contribute any more. I think it is fair to ask that a very small additional amount, which rises each year, is given back to the community, particular as the major parties often applaud the community contributions that are generated from gaming revenue.

The Treasurer has previously raised the issue that this will put a squeeze on smaller clubs, but of course there are provisions for the Treasurer to exempt licensees from making community contributions so that, if the club is in genuine financial trouble, there is a way of fixing that. This amendment can only benefit the community of Canberra, and I commend it to the Assembly.

MR STEFANIAK (8.54): I can see the rationale behind this and I have some sympathy for it, but what Ms Dundas does not realise is that the percentages that we arrived at were worked out in some detail, after a lot of debate, and were in fact phased in gradually. I am not going to go over ground I have covered earlier in relation to community contributions and the way they are worked out, apart from what I have just said.

I think the Treasurer is right, in that a lot of clubs are doing it tough and any further imposts imposed on them by the Assembly might well backfire, might be the thing that makes them go to the wall. That is not really going to benefit a lot of people in the community either. Ms Dundas is right: it is good to see that a lot of clubs do pay a lot more than their seven per cent. That is excellent. After all, they are there to help out in the community and, as I said earlier, most of them do that in an excellent way.

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