 |
Legislative
Council |
|
 |
||
| Mike Elliott Leader Australian Democrats Member of the Legislative Council |
Parliament Index |
|
|
Legislative
Council |
|
|
||
| Mike Elliott Leader Australian Democrats Member of the Legislative Council |
Parliament Index |
|
The Hon. M.J. ELLIOTT obtained leave and introduced a bill for an act to establish the Gambling Impact Authority and to provide for its functions and powers; and for other purposes. Read a first time.
The Hon. M.J. ELLIOTT: I move:
That this bill be now read a second time.
There has been increasing debate both in the community and within this place about gambling and its impacts. There is no doubt that the level of gambling in this state is increasing quite dramatically, and I think it should be noted that it is likely to continue to increase as a consequence of other moves the government is seeking to introduce. Whether they will be successful at this stage we do not know but, for instance, there is a proposal for proprietary racing, which will involve further gambling opportunity, and there are also proposals for the privatisation of the TAB and the Lotteries Commission. I have already been lobbied by some people interested in purchase, and there is no doubt that in seeking to purchase the TAB they certainly want to grow the product further. That is understandable; as private businesses their aim is to continue to try to grow. So, by way of legislation before the parliament right now, the government is effectively seeking to increase the level of gambling in this state further.
The reason for this bill is not to oppose gambling: it is simply to recognise that a very significant minority of persons are impacted upon by gambling. One can argue about the precise numbers, but not only do we have the people directly affected- those people who lose their own money, if you like, and some people might like to paint it as their own stupid fault-but also they are often married and have children. They are often impacted upon and do not make any of the choices that are made by the person who is gambling. Often their bosses will suffer. An awful lot of crime is committed to pay for the gambling habit, and a lot of it is unreported. The person loses their job, but there are quite massive levels of fraud. The negative impacts of gambling are significant. No sensible person would deny that there is a significant level of gambling-related harm.
For quite some years I have been arguing that we need a gaming commission in this state. I have been involved in a number of meetings and discussions with a wide range of groups and individuals. My present view is that we do not need a single gaming commission but that we need two bodies with quite distinctly different roles. We need a single body which acts as a regulator of gambling in the state. Instead of having the Liquor Licensing and Gaming Commissioner and the Gaming Supervisory Authority, I think there should be a single body which would seek to regulate so far as it can other new gambling opportunities such as the proposed proprietary racing and which may even regulate so far as it can, at a state level, internet gaming.
I do not think we should have different rules in relation to different forms of gambling. There should be high levels of probity for all of them. If people are to be involved, they should be licensed. That is the issue of the regulation of gambling, and I argue that that should be done under a single body. However, that is not the body that I am talking about in this bill.
The other important role that needs to be carried out is the independent monitoring of the impacts of gambling in this state, and that is what the gambling impact authority is about. It is not about controlling or regulating: it is about monitoring and recommending. The gambling impact authority I am proposing would be composed of seven people, five of whom were not involved in the gambling industry in any way and one of whom would be the chair of the authority. The liquor and licensing-
The Hon. Caroline Schaefer: How can you be sure they weren't involved in any way?
The Hon. M.J. ELLIOTT: I mean in a financial sense. It already exists in other legislation. If you read the Gaming Supervisory Authority Bill, you see that that sort of issue is already addressed, and the bill addresses it in exactly the same way. That was a government bill, so if you want to ask those questions-
The Hon. T.G. Cameron interjecting:
The Hon. M.J. ELLIOTT: If you look at my record on gaming machines, you will find that before Nick came into this place I was very actively involved in the gaming issue. On top of those five-and as we have other structures in place that should be involved-I think that the Liquor Licensing and Gaming Commissioner would be a member of the authority as would one member of the Gaming Supervisory Authority.
The functions of the authority are to monitor the social and economic impact of gambling activities in this state; to assess the extent to which gambling activities are or are not being conducted in this state in a responsible manner; to monitor the administration and enforcement of the prescribed acts; and to assess the extent to which that administration and enforcement enhances or diminishes the responsible conduct of gambling activities. In other words, while it does not have a regulatory role, it will be in a position to monitor the regulators and to make comment upon the regulators and the carrying out of their role.
It also has the function to propose amendments to legislation, modifications to the manner in which legislation is administered or enforced, and other strategies that the authority considers necessary or desirable for the purpose of enhancing the responsible conduct of gambling activities in this state. So it would be in a position, for instance, to make recommendations. For example, when talking about responsible conduct it could talk about advertising of gambling product, and it could talk about the liquor policies that are used by outlets which involve both gambling and the sale of liquor. It would also provide advice to gambling entities about the responsible conduct of gambling activities, and in particular the development of codes of practice designed to promote such conduct.
In some areas in gambling there has been an attempt to develop codes of practice. I believe that the gaming impact authority would be in a position to provide advice in terms of the development of codes of practice and changes to existing codes in such a way as to minimise harm, and to exercise the other powers and functions conferred on or assigned to the authority by or under this act or by the minister.
While I talk about the minister, I would ask members to note that the minister is the Minister for Human Services. If we are talking about gambling related harm, we are not talking about an economic issue but a social issue, and I believe that it would be inappropriate for this authority to be reporting to anybody else other than the Minister for Human Services.
It also should be noted that this authority would be independent in terms of its action: other than where this act specifically empowers the minister to give specific direction otherwise in carrying out the functions as spelt out in the bill, it would be totally independent. While the bill runs to some nine pages in total, an awful lot of the clauses are functional clauses. They relate to issues such as allowances and expenses and addressing conflicts of interest, and I suppose off-the-shelf clauses almost, which I do not think anybody would take any offence to in themselves.
Importantly, I think the role of the authority is to provide information-information for the public, information for the minister and information for the parliament-that allows for sensible decision making to be carried out. It is one of the reasons why I chose not to give this gambling impact authority any powers other than the power to make inquiry. So this authority can summon people before it if it requires information, but I think its major sources of information will be from the various gambling regulating bodies that we now have in South Australia, including from the multitude of church and other groups, and family and community services that are working with the victims of gambling addiction.
The authority would have the power at any time to prepare and present to the minister reports that it considers necessary or desirable for the performance of its functions. So it can report at any time to the minister. It would also be required to make an annual report that would be presented to the minister. In both cases there would be an expectation that within 12 sitting days a report of the authority would also be laid before the parliament, therefore becoming publicly available. That covers it in a nutshell.
As I have said, for a long time I have been calling for a gaming commission. I now recognise that we need two bodies rather than a single body. First, we need a regulating body that brings together all the regulatory roles of a range of different bodies we currently have in South Australia and, perhaps, covering things such as internet gambling and proprietary racing which are currently not covered. That regulating body would also need more teeth than is currently the case.
The Hon. Nick Xenophon: What teeth does it have? It doesn't even have dentures.
The Hon. M.J. ELLIOTT: That is what I am saying. It has some teeth but they have not been used for a while. I would then move over to the other body, which could play a role by monitoring the performance of the regulator in so far as, if the regulator fails to do the job and, effectively, as a consequence of that there are victims, the authority would blow the whistle. So, it would act as a monitoring body for the regulator but with no regulatory power of its own; its major power would be to investigate and report.
Where it is ultimately important is that we would have an independent body appointed by the minister with the expertise both within and available to it to enable it to ensure that public debate is informed and non-political in relation to future directions. I would expect that such a body would deal with issues that some honourable members of this place-such as the Hon. Nick Xenophon and I- have raised in terms of gaming machines not necessarily being the whole problem. The biggest problems are the way the games work and the way the gaming machines work.
The Hon. Nick Xenophon interjecting:
The Hon. M.J. ELLIOTT: It would continue to monitor the way gaming machines operate and I suppose pick up new trends. The industry will constantly have its psychologists and lawyers at work finding new ways of getting around the intention of the current set of rules. It could monitor what is happening with all the various gambling codes and, if it finds areas of concern in some establishments, such as advertising behaviour and the serving of liquor, or any number of things, it would bring those matters to the attention of the public and the parliament. The public and the parliament could then make decisions as to whether or not there should be any action as a consequence. I urge all honourable members to support the bill.
The Hon. CAROLYN PICKLES secured the adjournment of the debate.
