Page 5553 - Week 13 - Wednesday, 17 November 2010
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
from other jurisdictions into the ACT. This will be the snapshot. I understand it is a very large survey; it is a very detailed survey.
I do not believe, given the amount of either legislation or changes to the club industry that is floating around at this stage, that passing this bill today will give us the desired outcomes. The purpose of using evidence-based activity is to ensure that we get it right. To simply say that we can pass a new tax today and get it right I think says that we are not treating this seriously enough.
There are four packages before the club industry that affect problem gambling, and proposing more legislation as the answer to the community’s issues should not be the first response. This is the only response we have heard from the Greens: we will just put in a new tax. I have not seen any analysis that backs up what Ms Hunter claims and I do believe that legislation should only be considered after all other avenues have been explored.
Anyone who says that we are abandoning problem gamblers would be a liar. What we want is a comprehensive approach—not a bitsy, not a band-aid approach—to make sure that we do get it right.
I think that we can fairly guarantee that this bill will be amended when it comes back and I am sure that long term it will be amended again. I know the argument will be made that we have got to do something now. But, for the sake of a week or two and for the ability to get this right, I think it is worth the wait, and that is why we will be opposing the bill today.
We really do need to ask: what does this bill do? What does the additional legislation give the community? And what does this additional legislation take away from the community? In the most basic of terms, this proposal places an additional tax on the licensees of gaming machines in the ACT. I noted that Ms Hunter, in introducing this bill, said that the financial impact of the change was not significant. But, when fully implemented, this proposal imposes on licensees a new tax of 0.75 per cent of gross gaming machine revenue. It does not sound very much, especially if you say it quickly. But it is applied in addition to the longstanding gaming machine tax and in addition to the payments made as community contributions.
Ms Hunter says it is about $1.2 million and it does not have a great impact; they are her words: “The financial impact of the change we are proposing is not significant.” Ms Hunter is always very keen and the Greens are always very keen to find out the impact. So perhaps Ms Hunter when she closes can table the work that she has done to prove that it is not a significant impact on clubs. The problem is that, as always, the Greens have said, “Easy answer: social problem, new tax.” But they have not looked at the effect of that tax.
The combined assets of ACT clubs, I am told, are somewhere in the vicinity of $600 million. That is the figure that, in discussion with people in the industry, we have been able to come up with. The combined profits from the club sector in the last 12 months are somewhere between $2 million and $4 million. Again, there are difficulties in collating this; some clubs do a financial year, some do a calendar year
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video