HANSARD
SITTING CALENDAR
SEARCH
LIVE BROADCAST
Hansard Dynamic Subject Index
Legislative Council - Fifty-First Parliament, Third Session (51-3)
2009-04-29 Daily Xml
Contents
Pdf Xml

STATUTORY AUTHORITIES REVIEW COMMITTEE: INQUIRY INTO THE INDEPENDENT GAMBLING AUTHORITY

The Hon. CARMEL ZOLLO (16:04): I move:

That the report of the committee, on an inquiry into the Independent Gambling Authority, be noted.

I have tabled this report and now speak as the new presiding officer. However, I place on record that it was completed prior to my joining the committee and election as the presiding member. Consequently, I did not have the opportunity to take part in any of the deliberations.

The Statutory Authorities Review Committee adopted the terms of reference into its inquiry into the Independent Gambling Authority in September 2004. The committee received eight written submissions and heard evidence from 15 witnesses. The Independent Gambling Authority (IGA) is the senior South Australian regulator for commercial forms of gambling, including casino gambling, gaming machines in hotels and clubs, wagering on races and sports, and commercial lotteries. The IGA's regulatory and supervisory role is to ensure that an effective and efficient system of supervision is established and maintained over the operations of the licensed gambling industry in South Australia.

It is important to point out that the committee's inquiry into the IGA was not a broad-ranging inquiry into problem gambling and its effects; rather, the committee inquired into the functions and powers of the IGA and its effectiveness as a regulator. It would be remiss of me not to point out that five years has elapsed since the committee adopted the terms of reference. It is also important to note that, since the inquiry commenced, the presiding officer of the IGA has changed and that new codes of practice came into operation on 1 December 2008.

The committee also notes that the IGA is presently conducting an inquiry into the current barring arrangements and will report back to the government by 31 October 2009. Indeed, I requested that inquiry to be held, in my then capacity as Minister for Gambling. I am advised that the committee found it difficult to decide whether the authority had achieved a quantum reduction in the incidence of problem gambling due to the difficulty of defining a problem gambler. The committee received a great deal of then current evidence regarding potential definitions. A ministerial council on gambling, aimed at achieving a national approach to the challenge of problem gambling, released a report in 2005 recommending the following definition of problem gambling be adopted as the national definition:

Problem gambling is characterised by difficulties in limiting money and/or time spent on gambling which leads to adverse consequences for the gambler, others, or for the community.

The committee's first recommendation is that the IGA, along with any body it provides funding to, adopts this definition in order to give consistency to the authority and all bodies which receive state government funding in relation to gambling and problem gamblers.

The committee also examined the tendering of research contracts and believes the IGA should follow the general public sector guidelines for contract tenders in the future. Another recommendation in the report is for the IGA to develop a strategic and integrated research program with a focus on the priority areas adopted in the national framework. The committee also recommends that an amendment be made to the legislation governing the IGA in order to allow the IGA panel to hear evidence in camera and off the record if it deems it appropriate. The committee was concerned that individuals appearing and giving evidence before a large panel may feel intimidated and would not wish that concern to affect the person's decision to appear before the IGA.

Finally, the report recommends that the IGA maintain a central register of the list of names of barred persons who have entered premises when they have been barred. The committee heard evidence about the difficulty of policing bans, in that front line staff are required to look for potentially hundreds of barred patrons in crowded venues. This can be unrealistic and, yet, venues can be fined for having barred gamblers gaming on their premises. The committee believed that the implementation of a central register would increase the ability for venues to enforce bans on barred persons. Again, I remind the chamber that an inquiry is being held now in relation to barring mechanisms.

I will speak briefly to a couple of the recommendations in a moment but I would like to mention that, whilst this inquiry, as we have heard, was not a broad-based inquiry into problem gambling and its effects, as a former minister for gambling it would be remiss of me not to mention that the South Australian government is committed to minimising the harm caused to the community through problem gambling. We have been taking active steps and an active role in introducing a full range of initiatives to curb problem gambling.

First, together with the Independent Gambling Authority, the government is moving towards a system of better educating people about all forms of gambling and ensuring that gaming venues better support their customers to gamble responsibly.

South Australia has also taken a national pioneering initiative to bring the industry together with the concerned sector to advise on measures to help people precommit to spending limits on their gambling.

The Responsible Gambling Working Party has been established to develop industry measures that support people using electronic gaming machines to set limits on their gambling. The working party is focusing on ways to assist customers who wish to make a commitment to limit their gambling on electronic gaming machines. Precommitment trials have commenced and, I understand, are well advanced.

As a government, we have also significantly boosted funding for the Gamblers Rehabilitation Fund. We have introduced a Problem Gambling Family Protection Order Scheme. We have introduced a Responsible Gambling Education Strategy to schools and established an Office for Problem Gambling. We have achieved a reduction of 2,200 poker machines in the state, and we have flagged the removal of the fixed price on gaming machines to assist us to reach the targeted reduction of 3,000 machines.

In relation to problem gambling in South Australia, we are continually reviewing and implementing new responsible gambling measures. As a former minister for gambling, I will mention a couple of issues that were discussed in the inquiry. First, in relation to the codes of practice, the Independent Gambling Authority, as the senior regulator for commercial forms of gambling in this state, is responsible for the approval of mandatory advertising and responsible gambling codes of practice.

The IGA released its final draft second stage amendments to the codes of practice for consultation in August 2008. The finalised codes of practice were circulated on 15 September and they subsequently came into operation on 1 December 2008. The second stage amendments to the codes are the result of the IGA's review of the advertising code of practice; the responsible gambling code of practice; the gaming machine licensing guidelines; and the game approval guidelines.

The gaming machines advertising code of practice, developed by the Independent Gambling Authority, specifically states that the underlying principle is that all gambling-related advertising is socially responsible. The gaming machines advertising code of practice also introduces a range of new measures, including removing all exterior gambling advertising; removing all interior advertising within the premises, except within the gaming area, and directional signage. It states that advertising does not refer to factors that may induce a person to engage in gambling activity, including but not limited to prizes or benefits other than those available on gaming machines.

Gaming venues are exempt from these three measures in the advertising code if the gaming venue is a party to, and compliant with, an approved intervention agency agreement. The gaming machines responsible gambling code of practice introduces a range of new measures, including screening all sights and sounds of gaming from all areas in the premises other than from the gaming area itself; removing all coin availability, except from a cashier or a coin dispensing machine, which is located as to enable a patron to be monitored; and not offering participation in a loyalty program other than one which includes a precommitment program approved by the IGA. Gaming venues are exempt from these three responsible gambling code measures if the gaming venue is a party to, and compliant with, an approved intervention agency agreement.

Other measures in the responsible gambling code of practice include: develop a relationship with the rehabilitation agency, which patrons can readily access; staff are sufficiently informed and management level contact is established; the establishment of the internal reporting of problem gamblers, including the identification of suspected problem gamblers by gaming staff; review of records by a gaming manager (at least fortnightly) of suspected problem gamblers; and document, as part of the record, any steps taken to intervene.

In relation to the approved intervention agencies, the IGA formally approved Gaming Care for hotels and Club Safe for clubs as approved intervention agencies on 18 November 2008. Approved intervention agencies are to assist all gaming licensees and not just those which have membership of the peak industry body. As the former minister for gambling, I caused the codes of practice to be laid before both houses of parliament on 24 September 2008. In relation to barring mechanisms, again as the former minister, in August 2008 I requested that the IGA conduct an inquiry into barring arrangements under all legislation.

At the moment, various barring-related mechanisms exist across the TAB, the casino and gaming venues in South Australia. The authority is to consider changes for a simpler and more consistent barring across the gambling sector. As is probably known, a public hearing into barring mechanisms was held on 24 February this year at the Adelaide Convention Centre. That is well advanced, and I know that I am joined by all in looking forward to the outcome of this inquiry which is to report to the government on 31 October 2009.

I should also place on record that Mr Stephen Howells completed his term as the presiding member of the IGA and retired judge Alan Moss is the current presiding member of the IGA. Clearly initiatives, processes and events have overtaken some of the recommendations of the committee. More recently, also, the liquor and gambling commissioner has retired and the position is to be filled in the near future.

Other issues were raised and discussed in the inquiry and recommendations made. As already mentioned, I did not join the committee until this inquiry was completed, so I did not have the opportunity to take part in any of the deliberations, but I am certain that other members will speak to other issues.

For example, I see that the issue of research was discussed. I know that the Independent Gambling Authority is very committed to gambling research, and the research undertaken is listed in the report, but those members who did deliberate on this inquiry believed it should be approached in a more strategic manner. The government, of course, will respond to all the recommendations.

I take this opportunity to acknowledge the contribution of previous members of the committee into this inquiry, including the committee's previous presiding member, the Hon. Bernard Finnigan MLC, and the other members of the committee: the Hon. Terry Stephens, the Hon. Rob Lucas, the Hon. Caroline Schaefer, the Hon. Ian Hunter, the Hon. Michelle Lensink, the Hon. Nick Xenophon—the inquiry did go for five years—and our President, the Hon. Bob Sneath, who was on the committee as well. Indeed, I should acknowledge half the chamber. The Hons Ann Bressington and Andrew Evans were also on the committee.

The committee also thanks its staff—Mr Gareth Hickery, the secretary, and Ms Jenny Cassidy, the former research officer—for their work throughout this inquiry. I should mention Ms Lisa Baxter who has since joined the committee as research officer, and I thank her for her recent assistance as well.

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

PARLIAMENTARY BUSINESS
MEMBERS
GET INVOLVED
ABOUT PARLIAMENT
VISIT
LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL
HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY
CONTACT