SPECIAL APPEALS LOTTERIES

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK (14:29): I seek leave to make a brief explanation before asking the Minister for Government Enterprises a question about special appeals lotteries.

Leave granted.

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: A review of the special appeals lotteries was tabled in this place recently, which states:

The legislation requires the Minister to have the special appeals lotteries provision reviewed as soon as practicable after the second anniversary of the commencement of section 6 of this act…

Those amendments, I understand, commenced in April 2007. A review has been conducted for which submissions closed on 4 June 2010. I understand that this review process has taken some three years after commencement of the amendments. Of the recommendations made was one that stated:

A future review, but only after several special appeals lotteries have been held, is recommended. There is no need for legislative amendment to implement these recommendations.

My questions are:

1. Has the minister received any applications to date for a special appeals lottery?

2. Why was there a delay of some 12 months to undertake this review?

The Hon. G.E. GAGO (Minister for State/Local Government Relations, Minister for the Status of Women, Minister for Consumer Affairs, Minister for Government Enterprises, Minister for the City of Adelaide) (14:30): I thank the honourable member for her important questions. Effective from 30 April 2007, an amendment was made to the State Lotteries Act to allow SA Lotteries to undertake special appeals lotteries, and that was to raise funds for approved processes as defined by the act. At the same time, provision was made for the minister to cause a review of the operation of that special appeals provision as soon as practicable after the second anniversary of the commencement of the section. On 29 April 2010 the revenue and economics branch of the Department of Treasury and Finance released an issues paper seeking submissions from interested parties on all or some of the questions raised in the issues paper, or other matters that were considered relevant to the review of special appeals lotteries.

Submissions closed on 4 June 2010, and the report on the review of the effect of the special appeals lotteries was tabled in both houses on 14 September 2010. Some of the key findings of that review included that the effect of special appeals lotteries on charities and other lottery organisations may not be adverse to charities that are not beneficiaries of a special appeals lottery because of the infrequency of such lotteries, and the type of donor attracted to a special appeals lottery would be different to the type of donor charities rely on for their donations.

Some submissions considered that the reasons for philanthropic donations differed from the reasons for participation in special appeals lotteries, while others considered that the fundraising dollar is limited and donations would reduce if special appeals lotteries were held. Some submissions considered that special appeals lotteries should not be held, while others considered that it would be an opportunity for smaller charities to in effect gain access to some funds. SA Lotteries has a system in place to conduct special appeals lotteries. It was recommended, as the honourable member pointed out, that a future review may be more informative if conducted after at least some special appeals lotteries have in fact been held.

As to whether I have received any applications for a special appeals lottery, the answer to that question is no, not to my recollection. I am not aware of any, certainly not that I can remember. In terms of the process and the timing of that process, I have outlined the consultation that took place and the length of time that was given for submissions to be received and then submissions to be collated, etc., and I think that that was done in a reasonably timely way, considering that in effect no special appeals lotteries had been conducted and there was certainly no sense of urgency in terms of producing that report. I believe that was done in a timely way and that it was done with a degree of thoroughness, and the findings are now available on the public record.