Fair Trading (Ticket Scalping) Amendment Bill

Second Reading

Adjourned debate on second reading.

(Continued from 30 May 2018).

Mr COWDREY (Colton) (12:08): I rise today to support the Fair Trading (Ticket Scalping) Amendment Bill 2018. I note that the introduction of the bill adds to the Marshall Liberal government's consumer measures, having recently introduced the Fair Trading (Gift Cards) Amendment Bill, for the purpose of extending gift card expiry dates to a minimum of three years. It is, of course, another election commitment that was made to be delivered and introduced to this house within the first 100 days, and that is exactly what we have done. It is another demonstration of this government's firm commitment to putting consumers first and increasing protections in relation to legitimate access to tickets to major events, to sports events and to concerts.

The Fair Trading Act 1987 is administered by the Consumer and Business Services branch, and they do a fantastic job, and this bill and legislation being introduced I believe will go a long way to addressing some of the concerns that everyday South Australians have with regard to ticket scalping in this state. The bill is being introduced to address limitations currently exposed by the Major Events Act 2013, introduced by the previous government, which failed to appropriately deal with the issue of ticket scalping in our state.

Very few events were ever declared major events under the previous legislation, and not a single person was prosecuted under that act. In every sense this was a hollow piece of legislation that failed to provide any protection to legitimate consumers and customers, everyday South Australians who wanted to pay a fair price to watch their favourite team play or to see their favourite band—and we have had some fantastic acts visit South Australia over the past 10 years or so.

By way of concerts, we have had Ed Sheeran, Midnight Oil, Adele, Guns N' Roses, AC/DC I believe a couple of times in the past 10 years—a concert that the member for Hammond, I am sure, was well and truly on his feet—The Rolling Stones, Foo Fighters, Pearl Jam, Fleetwood Mac, and the list goes on. These are just some of the amazing concerts we have had in South Australia over the past 10 years or so.

We here in South Australia are blessed in many ways: we do not just have great concerts, we also have great sporting events each and every year. I note that we have had some pretty large events over the last 10 years or so: the A-League grand final, when the Reds did us all very proud in winning the first premiership in that particular sporting event; Crows and Power games, of course, are frequently held in South Australia; the AFL final series (obviously it was a very strong year last year by the Crows, and we have had quite a few strong years by both teams over the previous 10 years or so); the Ashes; one-day events; and, the T20 events, including our fantastic Adelaide Strikers.

We must make very clear what this legislation is actually seeking to do. We must also be very clear about what this legislation is not seeking to cover. We are talking about events of an appropriate level here. We are not talking about your local school drama performance or the local community group Scouts or Girl Guides, for instance, putting on an event, not even Peter Coombe playing his greatest hits from our childhood at, say, the Gov, although, I am sure for some in this house, particularly of my age, this would be considered a major event.

The bill also does not intend to prevent resale between friends or family members or genuine resale. It happens from time to time that events come up where someone is unable to attend a particular event, whether through sickness, circumstances or unavailability. I know that many in this chamber often have late notice for commitments and events, and likely have been in a situation where resale may well have been necessary.

Perhaps even one's taste in music or allegiance to a particular sporting team may change between the purchase of a ticket and the particular event. However, I am certain that loyalty to a team is something that no-one in this house would ever have any issues with. The government recognises there is a need for a secondary resale market. However, we also note that a secondary market has both positive and negative impacts for consumers.

While it does allow resale for legitimate purposes, it does also expose the consumer to certain risks, including unauthorised resale, scalping or fake or illegitimate tickets. As we bring forward this legislation and present the arguments for need for reform in this area, it is clear that in the future a consolidated national approach is needed, and I do note that the amendments being introduced here are based on the New South Wales amendments and legislation introduced previously. However, it is very clear that the time to act to be a step ahead on this issue, and to prevent where we can activities that are against consumer protection here in South Australia is now.

In terms of the practical application of this bill, ultimately the crux of the bill is to modernise this piece of legislation. When this legislation was originally drafted, there was no online marketplace for ticket resale and scalping which has now become so popular on sites like eBay, Gumtree and Trading Post—websites that were not originally set up to be used for this purpose. The idea of a bot buying tickets was somewhat fanciful just a couple of years ago.

The definition of a bot is worth explaining for certainty around this new technology. Bots effectively are software used to purchase a large number of tickets in a short period of time, therefore limiting the availability of tickets to the everyday consumer. These tickets are then later resold at a much higher price and often for profit. As a result, the availability of tickets to members and the general public is incredibly diminished, particularly when trying to buy them at the original face value. In order to attend these events, everyday South Australians are often forced to purchase tickets at a significantly higher amount via a secondary market. These bots are often described as cowboy software and often contradict the terms and conditions of websites that sell tickets in the first place.

Ticket resale and ticket scalping are fundamentally two very different concepts. 'Scalping' is a term given to the unauthorised reselling of tickets to an event at a price higher than the ticket's original face value for the purpose of making a profit. In the past, we have seen tickets here in South Australia sell for 10 per cent, 50 per cent, 100 per cent, 200 per cent higher than face value, even reports of tickets being sold to the recent Adele concert here in Adelaide at above 700 per cent of face value.

It is important to note that ticket resale is often legitimate in nature, for reasons discussed previously, and in other markets ticket resale has been authorised and legitimised through legislation. In terms of the operation of this bill, effectively it will prohibit the advertising or associated hosting of an advertisement for the resale of tickets or the actual resale to an event in South Australia to which the provisions apply. As I noted, the exclusions to that are for an amount that exceeds 110 per cent of the original supply cost of the ticket.

This policy aligns with other jurisdictions interstate, particularly the New South Wales jurisdiction. There will be a requirement that any resale advertisement must include certain information, including the original supply cost of the ticket, and details of the location from which the ticket holder is authorised to view the event including, for example, any bay number, row number or seat number that coincides with that particular ticket—a standard that is often used on resale sites both legitimate and illegitimate overseas.

Importantly, to deal directly with the bots on the internet, this bill will prohibit the use of software that enables or assists a person to circumvent the security measures of a website in order to purchase tickets for an event in contravention of the terms and conditions. Finally, the bill will enable the minister to require an event organiser to publicly disclose certain information about a particular event including the total number of tickets available for sale to the general public.

These reforms not only increase transparency within the primary market but they also enhance consumer protections with respect to the resale of tickets via the secondary market. Consumers will be better able to access tickets and will have greater information available to them to make an informed decision when purchasing those tickets. I would like to make some further comments in regard to the previous government's bill.

The former government liked to think that ticket scalping was not an issue for the everyday South Australian and that for some reason, having to pay prices well above the face value of tickets was something that did not affect the everyday life of South Australians. The former minister for tourism in this place often stated that the hype of ticket scalping did not actually live up to the reality and that, just because tickets were offered online at higher prices, that did not necessarily mean they needed to be bought.

These words really do diminish the rights of South Australians to purchase a ticket at its true price and prevent scamming. However, more importantly, this prevents everyday South Australians from attending amazing experiences, concerts and sporting events—events that underpin our enjoyment and amenity here in South Australia. Where possible, it is contingent on us in this place to ensure that all South Australians can access these events for everyone's benefit.

The impact of ticket scalping and the absence of legislation to deal with the issue do not just impact consumers or promoters but also impact the artists or sportspeople themselves. I note that many artists want their fans, their true fans, to have access to see them perform. They have said outright that they do not want bots consuming tickets but want their true fans and all their fans to have equal access to those tickets.

I did not think at the beginning of today that I would be quoting Taylor Swift in this parliament, but here I find myself. She has publicly stated that her goal is to get tickets into the hands of her fans and not scalpers or bots. That is a fairly strong statement from an artist, to make a public comment that they do truly care not just about selling the tickets to their concerts but who has access to those tickets.

The Hon. S.K. Knoll: She is a role model for us all.

Mr COWDREY: The member for Schubert makes a pertinent remark that Ms Swift is a role model for everybody in this house and, I am sure, more broadly as well. As an athlete, I also note that ticket scalping goes against any of the legacy principles and outcomes that most major events seek to achieve. If you look at an Olympic Games or a Paralympic Games—and I am sure the same can be said for the AFL and other large sporting organisations—the impact that these games hold goes far beyond those who are able to access the tickets to attend the events. In many cases, these events are well subscribed to very early on.

One of the true impacts of an Olympic Games or Paralympic Games is having the likes of schoolchildren and the everyday person be able to come, to attend and to see the amazing feats and experiences that each of our athletes has performing in front of a crowd that truly understands and is excited by seeing those athletes perform. These legacies, I believe, are tarnished in some way if we continue to leave these provisions in place, where bots can scoop these tickets up, sell them at a much higher price and, to a real extent, ensure that there is not a fair availability to all people.

This is also true if we reflect on the Gold Coast Commonwealth Games from just a few weeks ago. Again, as a major event and one that I am sure most people in this house—I notice that we have a group of young schoolchildren now entering the chamber. I am sure they watched the Commonwealth Games just recently and were excited by what they saw with our athletes. Perhaps, in the future, a Commonwealth Games could be coming here to South Australia.

To have the availability of tickets be clear, that they will be sold at face value and access will be given to all South Australians, is a principle that we need to make sure is present. It is very clear that the time to take action and the time to lead the way in terms of reform in this area is now. We know it is going to take a national approach to ensure that there is a consolidated and clear view of ticket scalping and that all the issues involved are covered. However, from a state perspective we can ensure that the bots have less of an opportunity through this legislation. That is why it was introduced in New South Wales, and that is why we want to introduce it here in South Australia.

From a national perspective, obviously the NRL State of Origin was on last night. Interestingly, instead of the event taking place in either Queensland or New South Wales it actually took place in Melbourne. The result of the game is certainly not consistent with previous years. I think New South Wales won for the first time in quite some time, although I do not have any real allegiance to either side of that debate.

The Hon. S.K. Knoll: Which debate?

Mr COWDREY: State of Origin. The ability of all members to access those tickets is incredibly important. Major events certainly are something that each and every South Australian wants to see.

In terms of where the future of ticket scalping is going and the future of ticket resale, overseas there have obviously been examples of authorised ticket resale sites. There are arguments for and against the authorisation of such sites. It is something I am sure will be covered by national legislation, which I do not believe will be too far away as this issue is continuing to affect more and more Australians each and every day. However, there is further reform that we do need to consider.

I believe that looking at examples of what has been done internationally certainly goes some way to addressing that. First and foremost, we have to address what we can address now, which, as has been said, is to eliminate the issues as best as we can to do with bots scooping up these tickets and reducing access to such events for everyday South Australians.

In conclusion, this bill reflects the Liberal government's commitment to easing the burdens on consumers and protecting them where protections are necessary, and this is certainly a place where protections are necessary. It delivers on an election promise. I am certainly proud to support the bill. I am sure there will be much more support for the bill from other members.

Mr ELLIS (Narungga) (12:27): I am pleased to rise today to support the bill, which is part of a series of amendments to the Fair Trading Act designed to increase consumer rights and protections and which fulfils another Marshall government pre-election commitment—another Marshall government pre-election commitment. It is startling the frequency with which we are ticking these off. This particular one will strengthen the protections for consumers against ticket scalpers.

As someone who loves his footy and sport in general, I have regularly bought tickets to events that I really wanted to attend, obviously, otherwise I would not have bothered buying a ticket to that event. Showdowns, particularly, are exciting for me. I enjoy coming down to Adelaide to watch Port play Adelaide regularly. In the past, I have hastily got online to purchase tickets for myself, family and friends. It is really disappointing when you find that you have been too slow and that they have been sold out already.

It is even more frustrating and basically unfair to see the tickets to events that you had hoped to spend your hard-earned money on, so that you can enjoy watching a game you really wanted to see or take your girlfriend to a concert she really wanted to see—which is more common than not to see one that she wants to see rather than one I want to see but, if you are trying to get some brownie points, it is not a bad practice to get in to go to those particular concerts—available for private sale online or on social media at hugely inflated prices that place them out of reach for the average punter. This bill aims to right this wrong and offer increased protection for consumers so that more of us can enjoy going to events developed, designed and marketed for the general public to enjoy.

Ticket prices have been carefully set to ensure that the event can meet its costs, yes, but also to ensure accessibility and affordability for as many people as feasibly possible. In this way, the bill offers protection for the event organiser and official promoter, who is often unfairly slurred by the precedent of overpriced ticketing from ticket scalpers. The practice unfairly reflects on event organisers, who are left appearing like they have let their patrons down, have not offered protection for them from scalpers, have not offered enough reasonably priced tickets or do not care about their attendees or whether they can afford to attend at the event or not.

The unjust result can be that event organisers can appear to be discriminating against sections of the community, only catering for the elite and preventing many from joining in because tickets are priced out of their budget. This is unfair to the people and organisations that work hard to organise and market the quality events that this state has become renowned for. It is simply not just or fair when prices are out of reach of the people the event is intended to attract, and this bill will go a long way to restoring the faith of South Australians who have been impacted by the activity of ticket scalpers who have been able to increase their activities in recent years with the rise of social media and Facebook's reach into every household in our state.

As outlined in the Marshall Liberal government's '2036' policy papers pre-election, we need to stop dishonest scalpers to ensure sports and entertainment fans are not fleeced by massive price mark-ups. The purpose of this important bill and the amendment to the fair trading laws is to protect the public from exploitation. It is recognised that there are already current laws that protect consumers from being forced to pay massive prices to ticket scalpers, but the current law only applies to formally declared major events, which are relatively rare, and that even then there have been no serious attempts to enforce that law.

The fact that there have been so few scalpers prosecuted under existing laws—in fact, I understand there to be none—means that scalpers are just laughing all the way to their bank accounts, and this issue has done nothing to restore public confidence in this state's governance. The example of the first 2017 Showdown between the Crows and the Power has been discussed, with scalpers easily acquiring tickets and marking them up by 300 per cent, making them out of reach and disappointing hundreds of families.

Such instances have created much emotion around this issue and have thankfully served to highlight the need for action. In fact, there was a huge backlash against ticket scalping at the 2001 AFL Grand Final, which sparked considerable debate on the issue and forced responses in parliaments across our land, but I will speak more on that later.

The bill before us will repeal section 9 of the Major Events Act and amend the Fair Trading Act, so that the laws apply to any event in South Australia that is subject to resale restrictions. This bill will also prohibit the advertising or hosting of any event where tickets are selling for over 110 per cent of the ticket price, in addition to capping the total resale price to 110 per cent of the total acquisition price. The maximum penalty, in the case of a body corporate, is proposed to be $100,000, and in the case of a natural individual, $20,000—sufficient deterrents, I believe.

Existing law does not address technological advances since its original passage, including the advent of ticket bots that purchase tickets online far faster than a person can and in bulk, wiping out thousands of opportunities in a second, which is criminal. This bill outlaws the use of ticket bots and provides affected parties, such as ticketing agencies, venue operators, artists and sports codes, with the right to commence proceedings against people using bots and selling tickets above the cap.

Increasingly, computer programs or bots are being used to enable scalpers to buy up tickets in a remarkably quick time. The use of bots allows security measures on ticketing websites to be cheated so that larger numbers of tickets can be purchased. This not only blocks fans but enables the scalpers to take a free ride on the back of organisers who run the risk of staging events.

The bill makes changes to the Major Events Act to enable promoters to declare more events a major event in order for them to be protected by the new laws and from ticket scalpers. It is unacceptable that the existing process to have an event declared a major one is expensive and time consuming, which has deterred so many from going down that path.

This new Marshall Liberal government is committed to running an efficient and stable government, with particular emphasis on increased transparency and openness, to combat a rising public tide of mistrust and disaffection from the political process, and more protection for consumers. With today's ability for anyone to easily set up online campaigns and reach thousands quickly and easily based on lies or otherwise, dubbed around the world as fake news, more and more corrupt behaviour is occurring and affecting increasing numbers of people.

You only need to keep up with the list of scams circulating at any time to know that there are very serious professional sinister communicators from around the world infiltrating our lives here in South Australia, so it is little wonder that people have become disengaged and confused by who to trust where. If you cannot trust the son of a deposed Nigerian prince to give you money, then who can you trust, member for Newland?

Ticket scalpers are scammers in this same way and must be stopped. Other states, too, have introduced measures to prevent scalping to send a clear message to these opportunists that they are not welcome. This bill is largely modelled on legislation that has passed in New South Wales very recently. In fact, it is only since 1 June 2018 that New South Wales has had its new ticket reselling laws, which, similarly to this proposed bill, make it against the law to resell tickets above the original value plus 10 per cent.

The New South Wales laws also include a protection for consumers, preventing tickets that have been resold at or below face value, plus 10 per cent, being cancelled by event organisers. Under New South Wales law, it is now recognised that buying a ticket from a scalper, whether in person, online or over the phone, carries two main risks: the ticket may not be genuine, or may not be provided at all; and a ticket bought from a scalper may be cancelled by the event organiser if the ticket was resold for more than 10 per cent above the original cost.

The new New South Wales laws to target ticket scalping apply to all tickets to New South Wales events that are first sold or supplied by the authorised seller from 1 June 2018 and have a resale restriction. A resale restriction is a term or condition of a ticket that limits the circumstances in which the ticket may be resold or prohibits resale of the ticket. This bill will work in a similar way. The difference is the New South Wales penalty for selling tickets over the 10 per cent cap carries a maximum $11,000 penalty for individuals, compared to our proposed $20,000, and $22,000 for businesses, compared to our $100,000 for body corporates.

Looking at Queensland's work in this area, they, too, legislated only recently and their new laws apply only to events at nine designated major Queensland venues. In Queensland, like this bill before us, it is illegal to resell or buy a ticket at a price greater than 10 per cent above the original ticket price, but the law applies only to events held in specific venues. There are nine stadiums and venues listed where ticket-scalping rules apply.

The Victorian government also recently passed similar laws with its Major Events Legislation Amendment (Ticket Scalping and Other Matters) Act 2018, which amended the Major Sporting Events Act 2009 in relation to ticket scalping. In undertaking research on this topic, it was interesting to read about the efforts in 2010-11 to explore the merits of a national reform legislative response to this issue. The idea was considered to have merit by the Commonwealth Consumer Affairs Advisory Council, given that there were holes in the existing legal framework across all state jurisdictions, and the council proposed an issues paper on the topic at the invitation of then minister for the competition policy and consumer affairs, the Hon. Dr Craig Emerson MP.

The Commonwealth Consumer Affairs Advisory Council invited interested stakeholders to make submissions on the topic and submissions were received from varying sources, including individuals, sporting organisations, online auction websites, and ticketing agencies. They included a number of high-profile sporting organisations, among them Tennis Australia and Cricket Australia, who voiced their opposition to the practice of ticket scalping and called for the introduction of a uniform national regulatory scheme against the practice.

However, the bid failed, unfortunately, with a final report concluding that national regulation was unnecessary, largely because the existing legislative framework was considered adequate. That said, at the time it was believed by many that a golden opportunity to address outstanding problems with existing antiscalping legislation, mainly the difficulties of enforcing the state-based anti-scalping laws and the confusion for event organisers who operate across multiple jurisdictions, had been squandered.

By opponents of the decision, it was broadly considered that whilst uniform national antiscalping laws may not have stopped the practice altogether, it would have been a useful deterrent for event organisers to have. Quoting from a submission to the Commonwealth Consumer Affairs Advisory Council back in 2010, Tennis Australia stated that it was against the unauthorised onselling of tickets for profit and adopted this stance because it believed it had an obligation, as a not-for-profit organisation, to ensure that events of national and international significance it organised, in particular the Australian Open tennis tournament, were as accessible to as many people as possible.

It was highlighted at the time by Tennis Australia that it sets ticket prices to ensure accessibility and that ticket-scalping practices undermine this effort. Cricket Australia's submission to the Commonwealth Consumer Affairs Advisory Council inquiry raised a similar argument—surprisingly—adding that 'scalping is a direct breach of contract that should not be aided or assisted in any circumstances' and that 'scalping involves profiteering by individuals who take advantage of our policy of setting affordable ticket prices and our strategy of providing opportunities for Australian families to attend the cricket'. And what a wonderful event the Adelaide Test is. It is a beautiful time to attend out the back there in sunny Adelaide in the middle of December.

The Coalition of Major Professional and Participation Sports submission to the Commonwealth Consumer Affairs Advisory Council gave additional rationales against ticket scalping—namely, that it exposes consumers to counterfeited tickets, undermines the integrity of authorised sales and preys on genuine fans of a sport.

Our Parliament Research Library, here in this place, provided interesting material from interesting sources, and I must quote from a paper published some years ago, admittedly, in 2006, written by Lynden Griggs, senior lecturer in law at the University of Tasmania, which was entitled—and probably still is entitled—'Ticket scalping: its legal and economic effects on the illusion of perfect innocence'. It is an interesting title, and it is so named because it attempts to highlight the vital role sport plays in our society, the value it has in our daily lives and the need for all codes and forms to be accessible for all.

The paper provided details of the intent of the Sports Event Ticketing (Fair Access) Act 2002, developed in Victoria in response to the huge public backlash there, which I mentioned before, against the scalping of tickets to the 2001 AFL Grand Final. This legislation sought to control the secondary market in the selling of tickets as well as controlling the activity in the physical vicinity of venues. The article from Lynden Griggs explores the principles behind consumer protection and antiscalping legislation and practical solutions offered as a way of reaching a compromise between the economics of allowing a scarce resource to be allocated to the person prepared to pay the most as against the inherent backlash of the traditional fan to perceived extortionate prices charged in the secondary market.

I particularly like the paper's introduction, which I believe gets to the heart of the intent of this bill in the house today and what sparked the writing of legislation in Victoria in 2002 after the AFL Grand Final ticket-scalping experience. The introduction offers this:

The role of sport in the Australian psyche has rarely been under-estimated. The tribal attachment to a football code and team, the insatiable appetite for information in respect of the players and the burgeoning coverage of domestic and international sport in the all-pervading media clearly demonstrate that, for many Australians, this country would cease to resemble a civilised society if all sport ceased tomorrow.

Hear, hear, I say! It goes on:

However, this is not a recent phenomenon—recall the ancient civilisations and the sporting stadia that they produced—

such as the Colosseum—

...bearing a striking resemblance to the modern architecture of the MCG, Wembley, the New Orleans Superdome and Candlestick Park—

in San Francisco. It further goes on:

Given sport’s exalted status, organisers and sporting codes have an obligation to ensure that, if sport is to retain this position, it must be run efficiently and fairly—otherwise the disillusionment of the fan base (the consumers supporting the infrastructure) will be self-evident and quickly dissipate any long-held goodwill. The illusion of perfect innocence will be forever lost.

Hence the tie-in to the paper's unusual title. I will continue to quote from that paper:

For this reason, ticket scalping (the practice of buying tickets for major sporting events at a low price and selling high) must balance the consumer-driven demand for tickets to be available in the secondary market against the palpably angry response to the long-suffering fan who is unable to attend the finale of a season due to the excess demand in the marketplace and the pricing of tickets beyond her or his reach. Despite ticket scalping arguably representing the quintessential essence of a capitalist free market economy, it is generally regarded as abhorrent and as something to be controlled.

Another colourful quote contained in the paper, which I feel I must share:

'Many people believe scalpers are the cockroaches of the entertainment industry. They were there at the beginning and they'll be there at the end, hawking front-row seats to the Apocalypse.'

This issue of ticket scalping significantly upsets many across our society, and rightly so. As vowed prior to the election by Premier Marshall, 'We will protect the public from ticket scalpers so they can enjoy major events like footy matches and concerts without being exploited.'

This bill will prohibit the advertising or hosting of any event where its tickets are selling for over 110 per cent of the ticket price and, in addition, cap the total resale value price to 110 per cent of the total acquisition price. It will also require that any resale advertisement includes specific details, such as the original cost and seating arrangement. It will outlaw software such as ticket bots that contravene the terms and conditions of websites that sell tickets.

Importantly, it will increase the number of compliance officers for the enforcement of minor breaches. In doing some research for this topic, I noted that that was a criticism of the scheme implemented in Canada. They implemented a policy to control the amount of ticket bots but did not have the necessary enforcement officers and found there was little result at the end of the day. Increasing the number of compliance officers should prevent that happening again.

In conclusion, this is another part of the Marshall Liberal government's pre-election commitments that we are delivering. I fully support the bill and its intent and hope that its passage is swift through this house.

Mr PATTERSON (Morphett) (12:47): I am pleased to rise today to support the Fair Trading (Ticket Scalping) Amendment Bill 2018. 'Ticket scalping' is the term given to the unauthorised reselling of tickets for an event at a price that is higher than the ticket's original value, where the sole intention by the individual or the body that is reselling these tickets is to make a profit. Ticket scalping denies fair access to tickets by members of the public who love sporting events and live entertainment. The South Australian public deserves more effective protection from this practice.

Certainly, my first experience with ticket scalping was as an observer seeing it happen in the United States. You would see people outside American sportsgrounds—for example, gridiron basketball—selling off tickets in hand and people buying them at overinflated prices. These were desperate people who really wanted to support their sport. At that time, sport, especially in Australia, was still suburban based. We did not have the national competitions that we have now; it was very much fan based and clubs were owned by members.

As a young fellow, I had many sporting heroes and I could not imagine the day when I would not be able to see my sporting heroes play on the field. I just thought that this was one of those American aspects that would stay over in America, but unfortunately it has been a bit insidious and made its way here into Australia. So I am very pleased that the Marshall Liberal government is taking a stand on this. We have recognised that all people should be able to go to these events, whether they be sporting events or live entertainment, and enjoy the performances.

The South Australian public needs much more effective protection, and the Marshall Liberal government will implement measures to protect people wanting to attend these major sporting events or live events from being exploited by exorbitant pricing. We will be taking strong measures to protect the public from scalpers. The bill includes a number of measures to increase consumer protection in relation to ticket scalping in South Australia. As previously pointed out by other speakers here, it was an election commitment, a commitment that was part of this government's plan for the first 100 days in office. Once again, the Marshall government is delivering what was promised.

These amendments put consumers first and build on other amendments that have been made to the Fair Trading Act to allow extended gift card expiry dates—again, measures to try to help consumers that will ultimately also help with their cost of living. The bill before us seeks to increase consumer rights and protections to fans attending sporting and entertainment events. As with many other aspects of sales that we have seen in the last 20 years, or certainly this century, the introduction of online ticket sales has brought with it disruption.

Performers and event organisers can now utilise online ticket sales, and it is to their benefit because they can supply tickets to their events online as well as by traditional methods such as phone sales and mail order. For the purpose of this bill, an event organiser is defined as the person who first authorises the first supply of tickets, and this could be the performer themselves. It could be a promoter, an operator or even the event venue. There are multiple people and bodies that can be classified as the first supplier of tickets.

Online sales allow tickets for events to be released at set times and for consumers to purchase tickets easily instead of by previous methods, including lining up in person—and we have seen the classic pictures of people in line for two days before a sale to try to get access to tickets—or trying to phone up at that time, rushing to put in their phone call the second the tickets are released only to experience that dreaded engaged signal. Online sales allow people to purchase at the same time to try to get access to these events, and what we have seen is a growth in people being able to attend the events.

Unfortunately, the mechanism itself also allows tickets scalpers to make use of the ease of purchase, enabling them to quickly sweep up tickets to onsell at a profit, and in so doing price gouge customers and consumers. Ticketing companies themselves have recognised that this is an issue and tried to counter the ability to purchase tickets online by imposing a maximum number of tickets that can be purchased in any one transaction. Quite often you will see there is a maximum of four tickets or 10 tickets, and the intent of this is so that people cannot stockpile tickets and have the event sell out from these first event providers.

As with other aspects of digital disruption, rather than an actual person performing this there is a growing trend for a number of organisations to use new software that utilises ticket bot systems that can be directed to bypass the security measures of ticketing websites. You can imagine that a person would be there selecting the four or the 10 tickets, but you now have multiple ticket bots effectively impersonating people but at the same time purchasing on behalf of a single person or organisation. Tickets can quite rapidly be purchased by these bots. They are bypassing these security measures of the ticketing websites and, as I said, in so doing purchasing large numbers of tickets for these big events. This all takes place in the same time that an actual person could make a single purchase online.

It is all well and good for these tickets to be stockpiled by a ticket scalper who then has to have a mechanism to sell them. Again, this is where the digital world has allowed for an ease of resale. Previously, you would see advertisements in the local newspaper as a way of advertising this, but now there are online resale platforms to resell these same tickets, quite often at inflated prices—eBay and Gumtree, to name a few.

As an example, at the Ed Sheeran concert at Adelaide Oval this year concert tickets were being resold on one such online retail platform, viagogo, for as much as $3,500 each. This happened moments after they sold out on the original event organiser's ticketing program, and they were then offered for sale straightaway. So you can see the frustration that might occur for consumers who genuinely want to attend the event to be obfuscated by these mechanisms.

The former minister for tourism stated that there was a lot of hype around ticket scalping, that it does not actually live up to the reality and that just because these tickets were offered online at high prices does not mean that people have to buy them. However, in Adelaide we are quite often bypassed by big international events in favour of Melbourne or Sydney, which requires the price of an air ticket, a hotel and all the ancillary expenses, such as meals and taxi fares, so sometimes on a commercial decision people decide, 'I'll pay the inflated price because then I can go and see it in my home town with my friends,' as opposed to going to all the effort of travel—and even just the time factor itself—so people are being taken advantage of.

I could relay the appetite of young fans, such as my daughter, who went to this Ed Sheeran concert. She was able to buy a ticket at a proper price without having to go to a resale site. However, this was done some 10 months before the concert itself, so you can see that there is pent-up demand to go there. The day of the event itself gives a snapshot of how much fans really want to go and see their idols, so to speak, and, as I said, buy the ticket 10 months in advance to the mosh pit to get as close as possible to this global megastar.

I probably would not want to do that myself, but in my younger days I have been in a mosh pit, so I understand the appetite for it. Just to get to this mosh pit is general admission, so there is nothing reserved. For those who have not been to one of these sweaty occasions, you can do a bit of—

An honourable member: Not for a while!

Mr PATTERSON: —not for a while—crowd-surfing as well once you get into the mosh pit. Just to get into these areas, they lined up outside Adelaide Oval two hours before the gates opened. The gates used not to open until the concert was on; in fact, now the gates open five to six hours before the actual event and then there was a 500-metre race against others to get to this mosh pit from the gates.

My daughter, being probably a bit younger than some of the others, although she is quite agile, ended up being nine rows back at this event. I should point out that this was in the open sun, it was 30⁰ and they were packed in as others then filtered into this area. It was basically standing room only and waiting for five hours before the concert started. Finally, when it did start, the sun had gone down so there was a bit of temperature relief.

In the end, she got to see the performance of Ed Sheeran. No doubt it was a fantastic performance, and by all accounts she will do it again. That shows some of the effort that people will go to in order to attend major events, and it gives a bit of a picture why these major events are so popular. At this stage, now that I have described the popular nature of an Ed Sheeran concert, I seek leave to continue my remarks.

Leave granted; debate adjourned.

Sitting suspended from 13:00 to 14:00.