Page 2927 - Week 10 - Thursday, 15 August 1991
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
I point out to members that when such allegations or imputations are made in debate they are not only offensive but also disorderly, as they often invite responses from other members. I believe that this is what happened on Tuesday. Once again, I call on all members to ensure that comments made in debate are made in a responsible manner, that offensive words are not used and that imputations of improper motives and personal reflections are not made.
I call upon Mr Berry to withdraw his statement and qualification.
Mr Berry: It is so withdrawn, Mr Speaker.
MR SPEAKER: Thank you.
GAMING MACHINE (AMENDMENT) BILL 1991
Debate resumed.
MR COLLAERY (4.51): I want to put on the record a response to what Mr Jensen said, namely, that no government had adequately responded to the suggestions of his select committee to provide a counselling service for people who were obsessed with gambling or had problems. Mr Speaker, I want to put on the record the fact that among the documents the Alliance Government left behind was such a policy proposal, properly developed within the administration. The matter was going to be considered in the normal budget process at some time down this track. I draw to the attention of members, in response to Mr Jensen's comment, that our government had set about reviewing that prospect with the further view of seeing whether it could come within the new policy programs in the budget.
MR STEVENSON (4.52): A label indicating an 85 per cent pay-out rate is no guarantee in Australia that people will indeed be paid 85 per cent. Justice Vincent, the Victorian commissioner of the casino and gambling machine inquiry, after a worldwide investigation, travelling throughout the world, indicated a number of points. He said, and this was in 1983-84, that the industry would not be able to be effectively controlled at that time, that there would be an organised crime involvement in it and that it should not be introduced. We see that the words of Justice Vincent have been borne out.
There were two types of poker machines. First of all, there were the one-armed bandits we know so well. It was the introduction of the electronic video display units and the requirement of imported technology that allowed a major organised crime involvement in the gambling machine industry. I suggest that "gaming machine" is not the best name for it for, regardless of what the pay-out rate is, it is not much of a game. Basically, you can only lose.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .