Motions

Gambling Regulation

The Hon. C. BONAROS (17:00): I move:

That the notice under various acts regarding Gambling Regulation Notice—Systems Criteria—Prescription, made on 11 July 2019 and laid on the table of this council on 1 August 2019, be disallowed.

The variation notice that is the subject of this disallowance has the effect of allowing cashless gaming in the Adelaide Casino. In March last year, the Casino operator, SkyCity Adelaide, made a representation to the now defunct independent gambling authority about using cashless based gaming and made a request for a number of changes, including an increase in initial deposit and ongoing account limits, consistent limits for transfers from cashless accounts to gaming machines and automated table games, an increase in the redemption limit for a cashless account before a requirement to be paid by cheque or electronic funds transfer and an additional delivery method of account statements to a kiosk.

The IGA had given in-principle agreement to the changes requested by SkyCity, but with the movement of the responsibilities from the now defunct IGA to the Liquor and Gambling Commissioner, the matter was further considered. The commissioner has determined that he considers it necessary and appropriate to allow the changes requested by SkyCity to be granted and to come into operation pursuant to the variation notice, as proposed.

What is astounding is that, during the 28-day representation notice, a joint submission was received by AHA SA and Clubs SA, which had the temerity to ask why similar changes are not being made for cashless gaming in pubs and clubs in South Australia. The commissioner, of course, made his determination based on an application made by SkyCity, and he noted that he would consider making similar changes for pubs and clubs but only if they made their own application.

No doubt, the AHA and Clubs SA will now make similar applications on behalf of their members to allow cashless gaming in their venues, which, when coupled with the gambling legislation we will very soon be debating in this place, will create a firestorm of conditions that will see the expansion of gambling across the state, starting with the Casino, if this variation notice is not disallowed. Increases in initial deposit and ongoing account limits are disproportionate, and they should worry all of us.

Under clause 4(2) of the variation notice, increases in maximum initial limits and the amount a person can have stored on their user accounts are increasing from $1,000 to a whopping $5,000, and that is for the average gambler. Under clause 4(4) of the variation notice, increases in the limits of an individual transfer from a cashless gaming account to a gaming machine in the Casino are increasing from $250 to $500.

Clause 4(6) increases the limit a person can immediately redeem value held in their cashless gaming account—it is up from $2,000 to $5,000 dollars in cash. If they are in a premier VIP gaming room the withdrawal amount goes up from $2,000 to $10,000 in cash. Subclause (6) also imposes a new limit that a person can immediately redeem value held in an anonymous cashless gaming account in a gaming area: $2,500 in cash, absolutely anonymously and no questions asked.

These measures, coupled with the imminent gambling legislation we are due to debate, will, as I said, operate as a firestorm of conditions, making it easier and faster to gamble and lose huge sums of money. I for one do not support the proposed changes. These changes will mean that people will be able to have access to, in some cases, five times the amount of money than they previously had access to, and in a cashless setting.

For those reasons, I advise that I will be taking this disallowance motion to a vote in two weeks. I am sure, by that time, we will also have the gambling legislation before us and members will be able to see that this is part of a much broader raft of changes that this Liberal government is making, which will make gambling, and in particular gambling on poker machines, much more accessible without any consideration or regard for the damage those machines have on our communities. With those words, I commend the motion to the chamber.

Debate adjourned on motion of Hon. T.J. Stephens.