Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2005 Week 5 Hansard (7 April) . . Page.. 1550..
MS GALLAGHER (continuing):
Question resolved in the affirmative.
Bill agreed to in principle.
Leave granted to dispense with the detail stage.
Bill agreed to.
Orders of the day—discharge
Motion (by Mr Stefaniak , by leave) agreed to:
That order of the day No 2, Private Members' business, relating to the Gaming Machine Amendment Bill 2004 (No 4), be discharged from the Notice Paper.
Gaming Machine Amendment Bill 2005
Debate resumed from 15 March 2005, on motion by Mr Quinlan:
That this bill be agreed to in principle.
MR STEFANIAK: Carrying on now with the substantive bill, as I indicated, one of the main things it does is remove some problems in relation to unintended serious consequences to clubs as a result of giving the ACT Gambling and Racing Commission power to cancel licences where the election of the committee could be influenced by someone who is not a voting member, or all voting members did not have complete control over the election for sundry other reasons.
The fact is that a lot of the clubs are there for specific purposes. Associated bodies elect or nominate some of their members to the governing body—that is how it is operated. That was what my bill was about. Sections 1 to 5 are an exact copy of that—I make that point. The opposition will be supporting the Gaming Machine Amendment Bill.
The other sections of the government bill—the sections that do not relate to issues over club directors—are technical in nature and serve to make it clear that contraventions of the act are subject to the criminal code. Apparently this was only assumed before, but it has now been made transparent. Examples of contraventions that could be prosecuted as criminal matters are unlawful activities relating to gaming activities, such as theft, fraud or falsifying a document or return required by the act or the commission.
I understand the Greens are proposing a number of amendments—I will speak briefly to those when we come to them. We will not be supporting those amendments as they would have a number of potentially serious consequences if they were to be accepted. I will make a few brief comments on that later. The opposition will be supporting this bill.
DR FOSKEY (Molonglo) (4.29): While I support the majority of the Gaming Machine Amendment Bill 2005, I will be opposing clauses 9, 10 and 11 of the bill. I support the majority because I recognise that the changes are primarily addressing minor detail and