Page 5561 - Week 13 - Wednesday, 17 November 2010
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
Interestingly, last week the New South Wales parliament passed a bill to prohibit donations to political parties from property developers, tobacco companies, alcohol companies and gaming machine companies. They recognised the problem created by the gaming industry and acknowledged that political parties should not benefit from it. They recognised that the gravity of the harm necessitates a prohibition on even the perception of their involvement in decision making.
The proposal that Ms Hunter has put forward does not create an overly burdensome requirement on licence holders. They already pay one of the lowest amounts, if not the lowest, of gaming machine tax in the country. We believe this increase is not an unreasonable impost, particularly given the nature of the harm it is addressing. That makes it all the more warranted. There is a real need to address the issue of problem gambling, and this is an entirely stand-alone scheme. We welcome the support in principle that it is going to receive today.
I cannot finish without commenting on some of the observations that Mr Smyth has made today. I am not quite sure where to start, but the thing that I find most gobsmacking is the hypocrisy of the debate we have seen here in the chamber today. This morning, for more than two hours we debated issues around the cost of living. As we identified at the time, that is an important debate to have. The Liberal Party railed against both the Greens and the government for not caring. They patently verballed the things we said and were drawing their own conclusions. I guess they are entitled to do that. But it seems the Liberal Party are happy to ignore helping those facing the economic hardship caused by problem gambling.
This is a real measure that can make a real difference today. Mr Smyth prefers the head-in-the sand approach. “Let’s wait till manana, some time in the distance.” He is running a line that we do not have enough evidence. He should go back and read Ms Hunter’s introductory speech. I hope he listened to some of the evidence I just provided. There is plenty of evidence.
When it comes to the cost of living issue, it is important to go back to some of the figures that Ms Hunter spoke about in her introductory speech. She said:
Problem gamblers account for between 22 and 60 per cent of gaming machine revenue, the average being around 42 per cent. There is no evidence to suggest that the ACT is significantly different from the average. It is therefore reasonable to assume that approximately $41 million of gaming machine revenue last year came from problem gamblers, or about $6,830 each.
If we want to talk about the cost of living, let us talk about that one which people are losing into the gaming machines and which impacts on their families. Yes, the price of electricity has increased. Yes, various other costs have increased. But $6,000 to $7,000 a year is a real impact on a household budget. Let us see some real action from the Liberal Party in helping to tackle the financial hardship that 6,000 people here in the ACT are projected to be facing.
That is real action. That is making a difference when it comes to tackling financial hardship and the struggle that real people in the real suburbs face. For all the rhetoric
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video