Page 4042 - Week 13 - Thursday, 6 December 2007
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
issue still must be resolved by the Assembly itself. The self-government act makes that clear, and our standing orders, which are pulled from the self-government act, make that clear also. These are matters for the Assembly to decide. Mr Smyth’s motion and the proposed inquiry will add nothing to that debate. It is a political endeavour; it is a political ambit, but its logic is flawed and the consequences are far more wide ranging than I think Mr Smyth realises. The government will not be supporting the motion.
DR FOSKEY (Molonglo) (11.48): I am going to take it as read that Mr Smyth’s motion is about the Labor Party’s ownership of clubs, because I believe that his motion does give rise to substantive issues. The first is the potential conflict of interest of Labor Party members that arises because of income from poker machines and, secondly, the adequacy of the standing orders to deal with the current situation.
I would like to preface my discussion on the first point by saying that, on deciding whether this issue should be referred to a standing committee, we have to debate the merits of the issue, because we have to decide whether it is worth referring it to a standing committee which is already busy. That is not to assert that any conflict of interest does exist or that any impropriety has occurred. Rather, I would say that, given the current facts, there is the potential for this to be the case, which is why we are having the debate—the circumstances may give rise to this perception.
The very fact that we are having this debate—and that we have had it before—indicates that there is a problem. Reasonable and respected members of our community believe there is a problem, and I would argue that, because of this, there is. Not only must the Assembly and the government be absolutely free of any potential conflicts; they must be seen to be and, arguably, they are not. Where there are any potential conflicts, of course, they must be stated.
Conflicts of interest will invariably arise throughout the life of the Assembly. It is not necessarily a bad thing, so long as they are dealt with appropriately to ensure probity and public confidence. I remember that I had to stand up and state that I lived in a government house every time I spoke on that topic, because that was seen as a conflict of interest.
The way I see the issue is that the ACT Labor Party receives a significant portion of its income from Labor clubs. In and of itself there is nothing wrong with this, and we are all aware of the contribution of clubs to our community. However, these clubs own and operate a large number of Canberra’s poker machines, and a very large proportion of their profits come from poker machines. Therefore, a proportion of the money that goes into the slots of these machines goes directly into Labor Party revenue.
When a Labor Party member stands for re-election in October next year, money from poker machines will be spent on his or her campaign. Therefore, money from poker machines will be used for the benefit of current members who want to get re-elected and who now decide how the industry should be regulated and, effectively, how much money is going to go into those slots.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .