Page 3085 - Week 09 - Tuesday, 22 August 2017
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
bill would mean that elements of an offence are created by regulation. The revised explanatory statement, which I have just tabled, also provides further detail about the comments.
As I outlined when introducing this bill, the decision to address the issue through regulation was a deliberate and important feature of the bill. The regulation-making power in the bill has been broadly constructed to allow the government to intervene as needed to minimise gambling harm. The government will be monitoring the effects of the new measures and will respond quickly if there is evidence that cash withdrawals from EFTPOS facilities remain an issue.
The definition of “cash facility” in the Gaming Machine Act recognises that these facilities can include ATM facilities, EFTPOS facilities and any other facility for gaining access to cash or credit. It is appropriate that the regulation-making power reflects all of these elements, rather than being limited to a single form of cash facility.
Small clubs and hotels will be exempt from the new EFTPOS restrictions, as they are, currently, from the $250 ATM withdrawal limit. These exemptions recognise that gross revenue per gaming machine is generally lower in small clubs and hotels. In addition, hotel customers may have accommodation costs and other tourism-related reasons for requiring access to higher amounts of cash.
We know that Canberrans expect the government to act to reduce gambling harm. Today’s bill represents government getting down to business in meeting that expectation. This bill was developed based on evidence about the availability of cash at clubs. It implements restrictions on cash, a measure supported by expert evidence, and it has been developed through a consultation process that means it can be implemented quickly and effectively.
In supporting this bill, it is important to remember the context. The government recognises that our approach to harm minimisation must be comprehensive. There are a range of regulations already in place to minimise the impacts of problem gambling. We are hard at work evaluating and building on these existing measures to keep on strengthening our harm minimisation framework.
Just this year, the government increased the problem gambling assistance levy; it introduced legislation and provided funding in the budget to help clubs diversify away from gaming revenue; and we are currently looking at the best ways to meet our commitment to reduce electronic gaming machines to 4,000 by the year 2020.
Today’s bill is an important part of our comprehensive harm minimisation agenda. As with all of our harm minimisation rules, we will be monitoring how it is implemented and making sure that it continues to serve its purpose. The government is committed to minimising the impact of problem gambling in this community. As we are doing today, we will keep responding to changing conditions and to new evidence with new and more effective regulations. I commend the bill to the Assembly.
Question resolved in the affirmative.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video