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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2004 Week 02 Hansard (Tuesday, 2 March 2004) . . Page.. 589 ..

community, but if this does not continue I will be pursuing a future amendment bill that will ensure all licensees are placed on a level footing when it comes to contributing to the community. Therefore it is up to taverns to ensure that they voluntarily contribute significantly to the community or they will soon find that they will be forced to. At the moment some taverns are very vigilant about who they contribute to and at what level they contribute. The Jamison Inn, for example, contributed last year nearly double their gross gaming machine revenue to the community. However, some taverns, such as Olims Canberra Hotel and Symonston Tavern, contributed nothing to the community. If these taverns do not start putting back into the community, we as legislators will need to ensure that minimum levels of contributions are made.

I will not be supporting the second element of Mr Stefaniak’s bill that seeks to insert a new section 21A that would allow for the transfer ability of gaming machines between clubs. This would lead to highly predatory behaviour by the bigger clubs which would seek to take over the smaller clubs and transfer the smaller clubs’ gaming machines to the bigger, more profitable venues. Smaller clubs are an important institution in the fabric of our society and should be afforded some level of protection. Whilst I am not saying we should subsidise small clubs or in any way keep them financially viable, I do believe we should legislate to ensure they are allowed to operate in a non-predatory environment. Therefore I will not be supporting Mr Stefaniak’s clause that would allow for the transferability of gaming machines.

Gaming machines cause and perpetuate many of society’s problems but the revenue they raise can also be used to improve society through providing for community infrastructure and assisting those less fortunate in society. Therefore I am supportive of their existence as long as they exist within a tightly regulated framework that ensures that gaming machine revenue contributes in some meaningful and significant way to the ACT and society as a whole. I am encouraged that contributions will also be monitored by Mr Quinlan to ensure that all taverns and hotels contribute fairly to the community in the future.

MS DUNDAS (12.14 am): The Democrats have long held grave concerns about the adverse impacts of gaming machines, particularly on the poor and vulnerable people in our community and their families. We still have to grapple with the good done by minimal community contributions coming from gaming machine revenue and ask whether it is worth the wider cost of the damage done by problem gambling on gaming machines. We recognise that some people do enjoy pokies socially without becoming problem gamblers, so we turn to the question of whether it makes sense to allow some licensed premises to own poker machines and others to be denied licences. We also have to reach a position on the rules governing mandatory community contributions.

The intensive scheme to encourage higher contributions from gambling revenue to women’s sport was extensively debated back in June 2002 and at that time the Assembly supported my amendment to place a sunset clause on this provision. As I am sure members are aware, I believe women’s sport should be just as well funded as men’s sport. We have discussed it extensively in terms of women participating in what are normally seen as men’s sports such as AFL and soccer, and I think it is important that women are supported in those sporting activities.

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