Page 2516 - Week 07 - Wednesday, 1 August 2018
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
Services, which looks at the oversight and regulation of the area, what I can say is that it is a far more complex thing than simply the number of machines equating to gaming machine income.
What the government will continue to do, and certainly from my portfolio responsibilities we will continue to do, is to assist clubs in a number of ways away from relying on gaming machine revenue.
Mr Barr: May I add to the answer as it does relate to my portfolio?
MADAM SPEAKER: Clerk, is there a capacity—
Mr Barr: If the clock has stopped, that is okay; depending on what the supplementary is, I may be able to assist.
MR PARTON: Minister, if gaming tax revenue is forecast to go up while your machine reduction is going on, does that not suggest that the machine reduction has no effect whatsoever on the level of poker machine gambling in the territory?
MR BARR: A range of tax lines are impacted by general economic activity as well as contributions from a number of different sectors of gaming activity. Members would be aware that the territory’s total gaming tax take is broader than just that of poker machines; it also includes activity at the casino, interstate lotteries and the like. There are a range of taxes on gambling products.
Tax lines are also impacted not only by the rate of general economic growth but also by population growth, so another factor that members would need to consider is the number of people undertaking gaming activities. As our population grows each year, most of our revenue lines grow each year. The interesting analysis that members may want to consider is whether this is nominal or real growth. They would then need to look at inflation, population growth and a range of other factors before reaching the conclusion that the shadow minister has already leapt to, I think without undertaking that analysis.
Energy—national energy guarantee
MR PETTERSSON: My question is to the Minister for Climate Change and Sustainability. Minister, what are the issues of concern with the federal government’s proposed national energy guarantee?
MR RATTENBURY: I thank Mr Pettersson for the question. The ACT has expressed a number of concerns with the policy. These are concerns that we share with some of the other jurisdictions. I think it boils down to what the promise of the NEG has been. The federal government has made a great deal of four key things: emissions reductions, reliability, certainty and costs. On each of those we have concerns that the NEG is not going to measure up as promised.
Certainly, when it comes to emissions, it is quite clear that, with the national energy guarantee—and this has been well modelled—the target of just 26 per cent emissions
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video