<< back to archive index Speeches Regarding Bills Date: 24th June Subject: Gaming Machines (Shutdown Periods) Bill 2003 From Hansard The Hon. Dr ARTHUR CHESTERFIELD-EVANS: "On previous occasions I have spoken at length about the problems associated with gaming and gambling in this State and the Carr Government's feeble attempts to mitigate social costs associated with problem gambling. The Tasmanian Gaming Commission produces a very comprehensive statistical analysis for government revenue generated from gambling and makes State-by-State comparisons. The November 2000 edition of the Australian gambling statistics shows that New South Wales government revenue from gaming has had a relatively minor increase in gaming revenue. In 1998-99 it was $1.214 billion, in 1999-2000 it increased to $1.35 billion, and in 2000-01 it was $1.055 billion. Some 88.6 per cent of government revenue generated from gambling comes from gaming machines as opposed to just 11.3 per cent from racing. Table 12 of the report I have mentioned shows that since 1998-99 there has been a 2 per cent increase in gambling revenue generated from gaming, with a corresponding decrease in racing. I would be very interested to know whether the 104,000 statewide poker machines introduced under the 2001 Act will have any significant effect. A report entitled "Vanishing Acts: An inquiry into the state of live popular music opportunities in NSW", a joint research project by the Australia Council and the New South Wales Ministry for the Arts, has a very interesting analysis of the live music scene. The report was completed in July 2002. However, it was not publicly released until May this year-yet another fine example of Carr Government transparency and accountability! Statewide, 93 per cent of hotels operated poker machines, yielding an average of 13 machines per hotel. While only 84 per cent of metropolitan hotels operated poker machines, compared to 99 per cent for non-metropolitan hotels, this group had a higher than statewide average number of poker machines, with 19. Some 99 per cent of clubs surveyed in this report operated poker machines, yielding a statewide average of 67 machines per club, and the average was higher in metropolitan areas at 98 machines. So have the recent reforms really worked? The jury is still out, and the Minister has indicated that the department intends to undertake a comprehensive review of gaming and harm minimising beginning around July. One thing the Minister should consider in this review is the compulsory installation of AAPPS, or automated assisted patron protection systems, which display onscreen information such as credit amounts in real dollars, the amount of time and money spent by the player and the amount of money won or lost by the player. Other functions can include a restricted function of play through on auto gamble, a message display of help services for problem gamblers and a time delay when a significant win is made, allowing players to access their winnings and leave. This method of reality basing is one of the best help therapies available, and having such technology as a compulsory standard installation on all gaming machines in New South Wales would be a great benefit. The problem with this bill basically is that it relies on, but in fact is only mitigating, the shutdown period as the only method of counteracting gambling's influence. Some years ago I went on a political study tour with young political leaders to Las Vegas, where the big message to the hayseed politicians from down under was: Let us run our little businesses with no government interference. Well might they say that because, just as the tobacco industry was going to look after children, the gambling industry will not stop trying to take more money per machine per hour unless it is forced to do so. The industry will not co-operate in the implementation of measures to reduce gambling. In the foyer of a building recently I ran into a man involved in the gambling world who said, "Oh yes, responsible gaming is the way to go. There are a lot of things happening. The software development is really critical, and I come from an IT background," et cetera. The fact is that the term "responsible gaming" slips easily from the tongue-just like "responsible smoking", "mild" and so on. But these are just words. Basically, it must be recognised that the gambling industry will not stop people from gambling. It is up to governments to regulate gambling, and they are not doing a very good job of that. Restricting gambling time-or, in the case of this bill, weakening restrictions on shutdown periods-is only one available technique, and it is not a very effective or evaluated one. Yet that is all we have before us. When I suggested amendments to the previous Gambling Amendment Bill the response from the Hon. Ian Macdonald at that time was, "That's very new, Arthur. We will consider it next time this issue comes around." Well, the issue has come up again, but the Government has given not the slightest consideration to those amendments. In fact, the Government has chosen the narrow option of restricting shutdown periods and is not considering other options at all. I turn now to deal specifically with the provisions of the bill. The Gaming Machines Amendment (Shutdown Periods) Bill amends the Gaming Machines Act 2001, under which clubs and hotels operating gaming machines are required to close down their machines for six hours between 4.00 a.m. and 10.00 a.m. Under section 40 the Liquor Administration Board may approve hotels or clubs having a three-hour shutdown period between 6.00 a.m. and 9.00 a.m. on each day on or after 1 May 2003 that is a Saturday, Sunday or public holiday. The Minister stated in his second reading speech: Since the commencement of the three-hour shutdown, Clubs NSW and the Australian Hotels Association have reported that some of their members are experiencing significant financial difficulties as a result of the three-hour shutdown. We are talking at most about 60 clubs and pubs that will be affected by this bill. I hate to keep harking back to tobacco, but we have been worrying about the health of the tobacco industry and the health of tobacco farmers while 10 times the number of people whose livelihood was the subject of concern were being killed. We were considering the tobacco industry while all its customers were dying, and now we are considering the financial position of clubs, whereas it is the gamblers who are going broke and suffering real hardship. The whole paradigm is the wrong way round. What is the intention of this legislation? Is it designed to help problem gamblers, or to help pubs and clubs keep in the black? The question is not rhetorical; the answer is perfectly clear. The Government does not care about the gamblers. It is looking after the pubs and clubs. Although according to the Productivity Commission only 2.3 per cent of the population has a gambling problem, the Carr Government announced that $7 million will be provided to help problem gamblers. Family breakdown and personal debt associated with problem gambling affects thousands of families and is a burden that the State has to bear in welfare costs and human misery. Surely if we want to help problem gamblers we should not adopt such a slack approach. The Productivity Commission's report on gambling states: Restrictions on opening time would probably have few significant positive effects, unless made draconian by current standards. The economic hardship for problem gamblers is still significant. An article by Geesha Jacobsen headed "Poorest area puts twice as much into pokies" in the Sydney Morning Herald on Tuesday 3 June 2003 stated: One of Sydney's most socially disadvantaged councils today called on the NSW government to break the cycle of poverty caused by gaming machines. Councillor Thang Ngo said residents in the Fairfield City Council area gambled more than a quarter of a billion dollars every year on the 3,898 poker machines. "This equates to $1,915 for every adult resident in the Fairfield Council area and is double the State average of $906," he said. Mr Ngo called on the NSW government to legislate to reduce the number of pokies in Fairfield - which has one for every 34 adults - and other socially disadvantaged areas. "The government should consider 'regional caps' to stop the disproportion concentration of pokies," he said. He said while Fairfield residents were losing money to pokies at double the state average, they could least afford to gamble. In the 1996 Socio-Economic Index of Disadvantage, which took into account income, educational attainment and unemployment, Fairfield scored lowest of all Sydney metropolitan councils," Mr Ngo said. Fairfield residents spent 6.37 per cent of gross average income on pokies compared to the NSW average of 2.64 per cent, he said. Locals gambled a "frightening" amount, he said. "Residents spend 6.4 per cent of gross average income on pokies compared to the NSW average of 2.6 per cent." The Social Impact Assessment submitted to the Liquor Administration Board says the Fairfield local government area has about 9,200 problem gamblers. So what is the Government going to do about that? Under this bill, pubs and clubs can now apply for a limited shutdown period of three hours between 6.00 a.m. and 9.00 a.m. on their hardship grounds. By item [7] of schedule 1, new section 40A (3) will enable the Liquor Administration Board to approve a hotel or a registered club having a three-hour shutdown period if the premises "will suffer hardship to the extent specified in the guidelines approved by the Minister for the purpose of this section if its approval is not given". I thank the Minister's staff for providing a draft copy of the limited shutdown hardship guidelines. The guidelines are fine, but they really do not have any legal enforcement. I understand that there needs to be a consultation period with relevant stakeholders on the adequacy of the guidelines. However, compared with other States, this Government has a poor record of proclaiming legislation, and guidelines have an even more dubious status. I prefer guidelines to become regulations after a thorough public consultation process has been undertaken. Subsequently the guidelines could be disallowed if they were found to be unsatisfactory. It is a pity this Parliament does not pay the same amount of attention to sustaining live music as it pays to pokies. Again I refer to the vanishing acts report. Key findings of the report state: There has been a significant reduction in live music venues in NSW over the last several years, and in a significant number of venue cases, live music operations have been displaced by gaming facilities. The report shows that 11 per cent of all hotels and 16 per cent of all clubs that were surveyed had affirmed that gaming areas had displaced areas formerly dedicated to live entertainment. For metropolitan clubs this figure rose somewhat-to 23 per cent-yet remained stable across hotel categories. However, much to my surprise the report also stated: The causes of the reduction extend beyond the liberalisation of gaming legislation and in fact gaming has proven to be a means of subsidising live music. Both noise complaints and security requirements were other contributing factors. The report also recommended that the legislative structure of the New South Wales Casino Community Benefit Fund be amended to devote a portion of the funds to live music infrastructure. Since that recommendation was made, infrastructure has been largely destroyed by poker machines. Overall, this bill is a weak attempt by this Government to tackle the social problems associated with gaming. A far more comprehensive approach should have been adopted by incorporating the use of new technologies and publicly funded electronic pathways that are now used to link poker machines for jackpots. As a broadcast medium, that technology could be reversed to send messages to gamblers across the State. That technology was funded by taxpayers, not by the Totalizator Administration Board [TAB], and the practice may come under the broadcasting Act. The alternative is the use of cards to collect information about a gambler. Technology could be used to tell a gambler that he or she has a problem, or at least the amount that is being lost, to at least confront the gambler with the extent of the problem that he or she has. In Committee I will move an amendment to try to strengthen this bill. The effect of the amendment will be to ensure that a club or pub's claim of hardship will have to be considered in a broad social context. I will not speak at length to the amendment at this stage. Suffice it to say that this bill is another missed opportunity and will be of far more benefit to the clubs than to the poor old gamblers, who are at the bottom of the pile in this Government's priorities."

home | about | ace at work | issues & projects | media | links | sitemap