Page 1269 - Week 04 - Wednesday, 11 April 2018
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
Yesterday the issue of privacy was raised. Access Canberra officers and those undertaking GRC-specific duties are subject to the confidentiality provisions of the Gambling and Racing Control Act. Section 35 of the act requires that a gaming officer must not make a record of confidential personal information unless in the performance of their duties, and the personal and confidential information obtained under the administration of the gaming law must not be disclosed unless it is a permitted disclosure under the act. The penalties for the unlawful obtainment, disclosure, or non-permitted disclosure include significant financial penalties and/or imprisonment for six months.
Mrs Dunne asked whether these compliance checks will also be undertaken with the casino and TABCorp. The current program is specifically focused on gaming machine licensees. However, as the ACT gambling exclusion scheme also applies to the casino and TABCorp, Access Canberra will in future conduct similar compliance programs that relate specifically to the casino and TABCorp.
Clubs were chosen on the basis that they had the single largest physical presence within the territory and gaming machines present the highest harm to those impacted by problem gambling behaviour. Given that there have been multiple people on the exclusion register in multiple clubs being found to have been given payouts in excess of $1,500 from EGMs, this action is occurring.
To compare regulatory response, the casino is routinely visited by inspectors on behalf of the GRC around three times a week. It also has mandatory CCTV monitoring of all gaming activity, unlike all registered clubs, and, as such, the GRC believe that the risk of a similar event happening at the casino is much lower than at a club. The compliance checks began in the areas of highest risk.
Children and young people—adoptions
MS STEPHEN-SMITH: I rise to respond to issues arising from yesterday’s question time. In a supplementary question to Mrs Kikkert’s question, Mrs Dunne asked that I report back to the Assembly by the end of this week on issues relating to a permanency information evening held on Monday, 9 April.
As I outlined in question time yesterday, ACT Together hosted the session to speak with carers about permanency and adoption and provided factual information on the process. CYPS attended the forum to provide information and answer carers’ questions. Feedback from those who attended the session indicated that they appreciated a greater understanding of processes and felt that the information assisted them in their own cases.
As I said yesterday, I was concerned to see some comments on social media incorrectly suggesting that the Community Services Directorate and ACT Together had indicated that they would no longer be progressing adoptions. I was pleased to be advised that this was not an accurate representation of the meeting. However, I do understand the misinformation created concern among carers.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video