Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2000 Week 12 Hansard (5 December) . . Page.. 3657 ..

MR QUINLAN (continuing):

I might mention, while I am on my feet, the general comments that are made about John Broome. I understand since that time that he has stated that he did not know that his statements were going to be published in the newspaper at the time. I think to a large extent he conceded that there are probably some areas where the politicians should be passing the opinions, and then there are some areas where the commission would. I do not think Mr Broome wants to be seen as being anything other than the agent of even - handed administration and regulation of gambling and racing in Canberra. So let me make it clear that I have no intention of impugning Mr Broome. I do believe that if we are going to have a political debate, it should be carried by the politicians. The administrators have their specific role to play and need to be in a position where they are seen to be interpreting and applying the legislation and regulation in the most even - handed fashion, which I am sure Mr Broome would wish to do.

I do commend the change in the figure to the Assembly because, from all that I know from my previous experiences and from what I have read of what has been prepared, 25 per cent gross revenue is a much more accurate figure. If we are interested in truth and accuracy, then we should put in 25 per cent. I commend the amendment to the house.

MR HUMPHRIES (Chief Minister, Minister for Community Affairs, Attorney - General and Treasurer) (4.31): Mr Speaker, I oppose the amendment. In fact, I oppose most of Labor's amendments because they are an intention to gut the legislation. It is pretty rich of the Labor Party to tell the Canberra Times that they support the legislation, then (a) put forward amendments which take virtually every element out of it, and (b) then actually vote against the bill in principle. I don't know where the hypocrisy ends in all of that.

Mr Speaker, the figure of 15 per cent was determined by the Commissioner for Revenue of the ACT after an analysis of the position of the clubs and an appropriate allowance for overheads and costs which clubs bear in operating poker machines. The figure is a reasonable one, I think, representing the overheads associated with the use of poker machines. The figure of 15 per cent has been in legislation in a draft form now for a very long period and has never been quibbled or questioned by any representatives of the clubs in that time.

Mr Quinlan: March 1999.

MR HUMPHRIES: What about it? What is that, Mr Quinlan?

Mr Quinlan: That is the ACIL report prepared for the club industry, which is March 1999.

MR HUMPHRIES: Mr Speaker, if he is saying that the figure in there is impugned, I will have a look at that, but I am advised that it has not been reduced or increased by any arguments or discussions at any other stage. I will look at what Mr Quinlan has had to say, but I do not think that is a problem. It has been assessed as being appropriate at that level.

The effect of passing Mr Quinlan's amendment is that we significantly reduce the amount which may go to community organisations. Now, what problem does Mr Quinlan have with community organisations receiving that money? What problem

Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .