 |
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: I also did not speak during the second reading stage but the Democrats support the second reading. I will again put on the record that the Democrats believe that there needs to be a far more comprehensive review of gambling regulation in this state and of the adoption of a harm minimisation approach. This bill, I suppose, covers as much as is necessary for the time being, recognising that the TAB is about to be privatised, but the Democrats believe there is an urgent need for more comprehensive legislation for a gaming commission (call it what you will) with broad regulatory powers and, I would argue, a separate body to look at issues of gambling related harm and to act as a monitoring body, as distinct from an enforcement body. I believe that there is great value in separating those two roles. Nevertheless, despite the Democrats' desire for that to happen, we are prepared to support this bill as an interim measure.
The Hon. M.J. ELLIOTT: I did not speak during the second reading, and I do not intend to take up much time on this bill once we get going. I want to make one observation while we are talking about some frustration in tackling issues of gambling related harm. The other day a speech made on 18 August 1982 by Heather Southcott, the then Democrat member for Mitcham, was bought to my attention.
The Hon. A.J. Redford interjecting:
The Hon. M.J. ELLIOTT: No; before that Robin Millhouse held the same seat. The debate was about the legislation to introduce the Casino into South Australia. I want to pick up a couple of matters that were raised in that debate. Heather Southcott said that her constituents' concern was covered by the first two recommendations of the select committee, recommendation 11.1 and recommendation 11.2 (page 210 and 211 of the report), calling for a national inquiry into the effects of gambling because of the lack of such evidence in Australia. She supported this call and urged the government to act on the matter as soon as possible. The closest we have had to a national inquiry is the recent report that has so often been cited by the Hon. Nick Xenophon. At the end of the speech, she notes the need for a survey into the effects of gambling in Australia.
In 1982 the Casino was just coming in, and people expressed concern about gambling related harm. A select committee was saying that survey work needed to be carried out and that, by implication, if further action was needed, it would be acted upon. Some 18 years later we are pretty well at the same point. I recall that, when the gaming machine legislation was being debated, there was a call for a study on the impact of gaming machines as they were introduced, and it was two years before a select committee was established to look at that issue.
That is the major reason why the Democrats have become very impatient about this further expansion of gambling opportunity that has been going on, and there is still a failure to address issues of gaming impact. We keep hearing the Premier saying `Enough is enough', and now we have a temporary freeze on gaming machines. All sorts of interpretations could be put on `Enough is enough.' It could be for public consumption only. People are saying that enough is enough, and that is not a statement that there should be no more gambling or no gambling. For the most part, people are saying there is a major social problem and asking when, for goodness sake, we will get around to addressing it. We keep passing legislation in this place which enables further harm-that is not the direct reason for the legislation but it is a consequence of it-but we keep baulking our social responsibilities. Enough is enough, to quote the Premier, and we really do want to see genuine action.
Clause passed.
