Lotteries Bill

Second Reading

Adjourned debate on second reading.

(Continued from 26 September 2019.)

The Hon. S.C. MULLIGHAN (Lee) (19:58): I rise to speak on the Lotteries Bill. I indicate that I am the lead speaker, if not the only speaker, for the opposition on the Lotteries Bill. As the Attorney has made clear to the chamber, this is one of a package of three bills to reform the administration of gambling activities in South Australia, by and large, to consolidate those functions under the regulation of the Liquor and Gambling Commissioner, rather than the Independent Gambling Authority, as some of those regulatory functions were split between those two bodies. It is certainly the case that the Lotteries Bill is the least contentious and most straightforward of the package of three bills that the government has brought to the parliament. Nonetheless, the changes that the Lotteries Bill suggests are important and they will have an impact on the community.

Lotteries, of course, are not just those large headline events which are available to the whole community, where perhaps people may have the chance of winning quite significant sums of money, if not other types of property, but their various different forms are used by all manner and all size of organisations, including community and sporting clubs, as an essential fundraising tool to maintain their activities in the community. Changes that are presented to us in this bill will have some effect on how they are expected to manage those fundraising activities.

By and large, other than the transfer of the regulatory functions to be consolidated within the Liquor and Gambling Commissioner, there is some greater discretion for the commissioner to exercise or choose not to exercise regulatory requirements over particular types of lotteries. My understanding, from the information that has been provided to me, is that not only does it provide a necessary level of rigour for the larger sized lotteries that the community would expect but it also provides a corresponding discretion for those smaller fundraising type activities that I have previously referred to.

I also notice from the provisions of the bill that there is essentially a simple and stratified penalty regime proposed by the government, where many offences under the act, of course depending on how serious those offences are deemed, can be expiated, which I am sure, for minor, most usually unintentional breaches of the act, makes sense, whereas for more serious offences more significant penalties apply. That certainly makes sense to the opposition.

There are some quite simple and understandable changes in terms of the requirements that the bill places on people who are conducting lotteries and the requirements on them to provide information and advice to the commissioner when it comes to the running of those fundraising activities. It places the obligation on the organisers of those events to ensure that the commissioner is kept up to date, for example, with changes of details of conditions or terms, and so on. There is also a regulatory-making power within the bill. Given the scope of the fundraising activities, which are covered by this bill, it makes sense that there is some discretion for the commissioner and for the government of the day to be able to regulate different provisions when it comes to lotteries.

It is perhaps timely that this bill is now coming to the house. Certainly, the government and the Deputy Premier have made some necessary reference to the work examining the regulation of gambling activities in South Australia, which was commenced under the former Labor government, and now the current Deputy Premier, as opposed to the former deputy premier, is carrying forward with some of those recommendations.

The review, of course, that we refer to is the Anderson review. The main thrust of that review, at least on my reading, is the recommendation to change who regulates these activities in the community, not just for the type of gambling that most people would immediately think about, whether it is casino-related gambling, table gaming or gaming machine, or gaming machines in hotels and pubs, but also this other form of gambling.

It is also timely not just because the government is choosing to continue on with this reform program of gambling regulation but also because when it comes to lotteries out in the community, particularly major house and land lotteries, they have had a bit of a mixed history in recent weeks. We have seen some new ones start for the first time and we have seen some longstanding ones fail to reach an adequate level of subscription in order to be successful and taken through to completion.

I think it is perhaps worth pausing for a moment to reflect on the changing nature of the use of these fundraising tools to try to assist both charitable organisations and community and sporting groups to raise money. Certainly, my overall conception of lotteries was what we were all exposed to at about 8.30 on a Saturday night after Hey Hey It's Saturday had finished. That same old familiar music would start—I Want to Break Free by Queen—as the SA Lotteries and those three faceless, mostly men, public servants, who were never really named or identified, from the gaming commissioner, would have to sit uncomfortably in the TV studio and somehow—

Members interjecting:

The SPEAKER: Is the member for Hammond okay?

The Hon. S.C. MULLIGHAN: —supervise the conduct of the lottery, which I always found interesting, because they would be sitting at least 20 feet away from the spinning orb of balls from which successful numbers were ultimately selected. Of course, as people gnashed their teeth, as they frantically went through their easy-pick numbers and tried to circle what those successful balls were, there was a pause. I think Scott McBain was the person who provided the voice-over; in between voice-overs for ads like Jaffers Furniture and Transformers, this was the other main gig that I remember him for. But we show our age, don't we, Minister for Education?

Anyway, things have moved on, and I think having a clearer set of regulations, a hopefully more simplified regime, for people to adhere to when they are conducting these lotteries is a good thing. I hope that it encourages more people to undertake these fundraising activities, let alone more people to participate in these fundraising activities, because these sorts of fundraising activities do fund an enormous amount of activity, both for charitable organisations, which can flow into things like medical research, and for keeping our sporting and community clubs going in local communities. With those brief remarks, I conclude my remarks on this bill.

The Hon. V.A. CHAPMAN (Bragg—Deputy Premier, Attorney-General) (20:08): I thank the member for Lee for his contribution to this debate and his indication of the opposition's support for the bill. I would be happy to follow up any other queries that he might have in committee. There being an indication of none, I would move to the bill being read a second time.

Bill read a second time.

Third Reading

The Hon. V.A. CHAPMAN (Bragg—Deputy Premier, Attorney-General) (20:09): I move:

That this bill be now read a third time.

Bill read a third time and passed.