Page 5562 - Week 13 - Wednesday, 17 November 2010
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
that the Liberal Party gave us this morning, when it comes to doing something concrete, here is an answer. This morning we saw a lot of complaining. We did not hear a single initiative that was going to make a difference. We did not hear a single idea, a single solution. Today we have the same thing going. We have Mr Smyth giving us all sorts of requirements for needing evidence and a comprehensive approach. I did not hear a single concrete contribution to this conversation from Mr Smyth. That reflects extremely poorly on the Liberal Party. It is disappointing, and I think many members in this community who are concerned about this issue will find it extremely disappointing.
I also want to pick up on what could almost be described as selective analysis that Mr Smyth touched on. One example would be the community contribution increase that Mr Barr has spoken about today. We do not quite have the details of that yet; that is something we will have to wait for from Mr Barr in time. But Mr Smyth railed against the suggestion it would be a one per cent increase. That will take it from seven per cent to eight per cent. That is a debate we are going to have to have somewhere down the line about whether that is viable for the clubs. What Mr Smyth, of course, failed to include in his observations—I am sure he well knows this—is that the average contribution across the club sector in the ACT is 12 to 13 per cent. In some ways, many clubs are already giving well beyond the eight per cent, and I acknowledge them for that. There is a difference in the clubs across the ACT. As Ms Hunter identified in her original speech, it is of concern that only 28 of the 61 clubs and none of the 12 pubs or taverns make a contribution to problem gambling.
It is important to acknowledge that some are going beyond their legislative requirements and making an effort in the community. But at the same time—this is where Ms Hunter’s bill is a very practical step—there is a bunch of people who are not making contributions where they should. That is what we need to focus on. Instead of wafting around vague numbers and not giving the full story, we need to focus on the hard facts and the concrete proposals that are designed to make a difference to the people on the ground who have a problem, who need assistance and who are impacting on a much broader segment of the community once we take into account the impact on the families.
Let us get on the front foot and tackle this significant social problem that we as a community face. Let us take responsibility to help out those people who have found themselves in a situation which most of them would regret and who would welcome increased assistance to tackle the serious issue of problem gambling. I commend Ms Hunter for bringing this bill before the Assembly, and I look forward to it making a difference to the lives of many Canberrans.
MS HUNTER (Ginninderra—Parliamentary Convenor, ACT Greens) (3.51), in reply: I thank members for their contributions to this important debate. I outlined in my tabling speech in September that the current arrangements to address the 40 per cent increase in demand for help associated with problem gambling was inadequate. Based on the figures from Lifeline, we have around 6,000 problem gamblers in the ACT and research shows that for every problem gambler another seven people, usually family members or friends, are affected by this addiction to gambling. So we are talking about possibly 42,000 Canberrans affected by problem gambling.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video