Page 4034 - Week 13 - Tuesday, 17 November 2015
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
MR SMYTH (Brindabella) (3.47): That would be the most disingenuous delivery of a response to a report that I have heard in all my time in this place. If members had listened to the minister speak, she said on a number of occasions, “That’s why the government has either agreed or agreed in principle with many of the standing committee’s recommendations relating to harm minimisation or the task force.” What she did not tell them was that most of the recommendations have not been agreed to or have only been noted by the government. At a quick tally—and I do apologise because I am doing this on the fly—it would appear that 10 have only been noted and 10 have not been agreed to.
What we have is a minister who had an opportunity and failed. What we have is a government that say that this is a club town, and they walked away from this report. And the club industry in this city should be disgusted with this government and their response. We had from the minister a very short tabling statement because she had nothing to say. She said:
To further enhance operation of the community clubs task force the government has agreed, or agreed in principle, with all of the standing committee’s recommendations relating to the task force.
What—one, two or three recommendations relating to the task force? She went on to say:
That is why we have either agreed or agreed in principle with many of the standing committee’s recommendations relating to harm minimisation.
But when you read the report, Madam Assistant Speaker, you will see that they have snubbed the public accounts committee, which in its tripartisan approach worked very hard to deliver a path for the future, a sustainable future for ClubsACT—and this minister must go. This minister is not up to the job of any reform. In every portfolio she has touched—whether it be education, emergency services or the gaming and racing portfolio—she fails.
On recommendation 1, the response is: “Agreed.” The recommendation reads:
The Committee recommends that the ACT Legislative Assembly formally acknowledge the role that ACT clubs play …
Yes, it is kind of hard not to agree with that. In recommendation 2, the committee said:
The Committee recommends that, following an audit of all current club leases and permitted uses, and following consultation with clubs on proposed leases, the Government determine a list of permitted uses on club sites which must include community benefit.
The response is: “Noted.” There is no commitment to assist the clubs to diversify. There is no commitment to assist the clubs to move away from poker machines as their primary source of income. “We will note it.” We heard the glib lines, such as,
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video