HANSARD
SITTING CALENDAR
SEARCH
LIVE BROADCAST
Hansard Dynamic Member Index
Legislative Council - Fifty-Third Parliament, Second Session (53-2)
2015-05-13 Daily Xml
Contents
Pdf Xml

Bills

Statutes Amendment (Gambling Measures) Bill

Second Reading

Adjourned debate on second reading.

(Continued from 12 May 2015.)

The Hon. G.A. KANDELAARS (17:14): I rise today to support the Statutes Amendment (Gambling Measures) Bill 2015. The bill seeks to amend the Lottery and Gaming Act 1936 to make it an offence for a person to purchase or enter into a contract or agreement to purchase a gaming machine unless licensed. Members may recall a statement made last year by one of the people who were caught in possession of an illegal poker machine. He said, and I quote from The Recorder:

I Googled government sites to see whether it was illegal to purchase gambling machines and it isn't, however what I didn't see in the legislation is it is not illegal to purchase, but it is illegal to own a machine.

This amendment could potentially prevent others from making the same error of judgement. As I understand it, it would also allow authorities to act before a person takes possession. The bill also seeks to remove the prohibition of EFTPOS facilities in gaming areas in hotels and clubs. Some may question why we would want gamblers to be able to access their money from within a place of gambling; however, I believe it is a sensible amendment that is in line with providing a responsible gambling environment.

Since EFTPOS facilities, unlike ATMs, encompass human interaction when making a cash withdrawal, the gamblers can be continually observed by trained gambling area staff who can observe cash withdrawal behaviours and intervene when the gambler is exhibiting problem gambling characteristics. Currently, when a gambler has to exit the gaming room, they are less likely to be observed by a trained person, so some of the usual problem signs that occur with gambling may not be identified by an untrained person.

Other amendments to the Gaming Machines Act simply finetune the work of the Liquor and Gambling Commissioner and remove red tape. The bill also seeks to amend the Lottery and Gaming Act 1936 to make it unlawful to play or engage in the game of poker. This amendment, however, will allow the minister power to make regulations to prescribe circumstances where playing or engaging in a game of poker will not be unlawful.

An instance of where poker, in the government's view, should remain lawful would be tournament poker where a player's chips cannot be cashed out for money and serve only to determine the player's placing. There is no buyback or rebuys, and an equal amount of chips is dispersed amongst players who play for a set prize. The government has indicated that it is their intention to make regulation that clarifies the definition of tournament poker so as to ensure that it is not an unlawful game.

I note that the bill also makes amendments to the Independent Gambling Authority Act 1995. The Independent Gambling Authority has undertaken some significant work in developing and implementing barring arrangements that commenced on 1 July 2014. It is good to see a consistent, whole of gambling sector-wide barring arrangement for the first time.

I further note that the Hon. Tammy Franks recently raised some concerns about barring that I believe have been raised with her by some constituents. I think that all members should accept that there is always an opportunity to further improve barring arrangements for the benefit of the community and individuals involved. This is a complex area and is difficult, due to the stressful nature of the issues faced by people seeking a barring order.

So, it is quite timely that, in the same week as the Hon. Tammy Franks raised those concerns, the Minister for Gambling has tabled this bill, given that some of the proposed changes in the bill seek to provide the necessary flexibility to the Independent Gambling Authority to implement improvements in gambling barring arrangements while, at the same time, maintaining the Independent Gambling Authority's statutory independence.

The amendment provides additional flexibility through delegation provisions to the Independent Gambling Authority, which will allow them to delegate functions and powers to another person. This person could be in government or it could be a non-government organisation. With these changes, it is possible to contemplate barring arrangements that could be implemented on behalf of the Independent Gambling Authority by appropriately trained staff as part of a statewide network of gambling help services. The Independent Gambling Authority may identify some businesses facing synergies with Consumer and Business Services and with this amendment could delegate these types of administrative tasks.

There are many matters that I am sure the Independent Gambling Authority, gambling help services and the industry can work through together to consider alternative and perhaps more approachable methods for implementing barring orders. I encourage the Independent Gambling Authority to participate in this work, with a view to developing a pilot project, with gambling help services offering a more approachable method for implementing barring orders.

Additional to all of this, there are also some minor changes proposed to make it clear that confidentiality of information gained through the barring regime is maintained. Although one would expect confidentiality around these types of matters to be a given, it is always a good safety measure to make sure that these requirements are clearly set out. I encourage all members to support the bill in its current form.

The Hon. G.E. GAGO (Minister for Employment, Higher Education and Skills, Minister for Science and Information Economy, Minister for the Status of Women, Minister for Business Services and Consumers) (17:22): I understand that all second reading contributions have been made in relation to this bill. In making some closing remarks, I thank honourable members for their important contribution and I thank those members who have indicated support for this bill. There were a number of questions that were asked during the second reading debate, for which I have been provided answers, and I would like to put those on the record.

Obviously, significant reforms were introduced in the Statutes Amendment (Gambling Reform) Act 2013 and many policy issues were considered at that time and most of the measures have now been implemented. The bill proposes to fine-tune some provisions in the Gambling Machines Act 1992, the Independent Gambling Authority Act 1995, the Lottery and Gaming Act 1936 and the Problem Gambling Family Protection Orders Act 2004. None of the proposed amendments seeks to fundamentally change gambling policy; they are all focused on greater clarity and simplification for business and customers.

The Hon. Rob Lucas, in his contribution, sought further clarification as to the reasons behind the staff and the delegation provisions. The delegation section 11B was included in the Independent Gambling Authority Act as part of the 2013 amendments. The purpose of this original amendment was to provide more flexibility to the Independent Gambling Authority to manage its workload and to ensure quicker resolution of some matters.

As part of the government's board and committee review, the ongoing need and role of the Independent Gambling Authority was considered. The government formed the view that there remained an important need for an independent regulatory body for regulating major commercial gambling licences, establishing codes of practice and overall responsibility for monitoring regulation and responsible gambling outcomes.

The government acknowledges, however, that having both the Independent Gambling Authority and Consumer and Business Services can cause some confusion amongst regulated businesses and the public. For this reason, the government is proposing to broaden the delegation power in section 11B to any person or body. This will enable the Independent Gambling Authority to delegate an activity or function to the most appropriate agency or organisation.

Whilst not a conclusive list, activities may be delegated to, for instance, the Liquor and Gambling Commissioner, the Attorney-General's department or even gambling help services. The delegations can be the subject of conditions and can be revoked. This ensures that the Independent Gambling Authority retains responsibility for shaping, monitoring and improving regulatory and barring arrangements for the gambling sector, so they continue to have control and a high level of autonomy in relation to those things.

In relation to clause 12, currently the staff that support the Independent Gambling Authority fall within the treasury and finance portfolio, and I am advised that employer obligations fall on both the department and the authority. The government is proposing to simplify the employment arrangements and ensure that responsibility for meeting employer obligations falls unambiguously on a department. The statutory independence of the Independent Gambling Authority is not affected by this change.

The bill makes it clear that if there is inconsistency between directions from the chief executive of the department and the direction from the Independent Gambling Authority relating to the functions, then the direction of the Independent Gambling Authority prevails.

The Hon. Tammy Franks' contribution addressed the important matter of South Australia's barring arrangements. The government takes its responsibility for providing a framework to support people with gambling problems very seriously. A total of $6.2 million is made available each year to the Gamblers Rehabilitation Fund. The fund is administered by the Office for Problem Gambling and supports a statewide network of gambling help services.

The Independent Gambling Authority has undertaken significant work in developing and implementing new barring arrangements. These arrangements, which commenced on 1 July 2014, achieved consistent whole of gambling sector wide barring arrangements for the first time and offered significant improvements to venues and the people seeking to be barred. Nevertheless, the government accepts that there is always opportunity to further improve barring arrangements for the benefit of the community and those individuals involved.

The contribution from the Hon. Tammy Franks outlines a number of examples where she believes the barring arrangements could have been better. The proposed amendment does enable the Independent Gambling Authority to delegate its powers in relation to South Australia's barring arrangements. The decision to do so rests with the Independent Gambling Authority. I understand that the Independent Gambling Authority already has open dialogue with gambling help services, and I would expect that if this bill was successful, a conversation about the role of the gambling help services in relation to barring arrangements would occur.

There are many details that would need to be considered. There may even need to be further minor amendments to the statutory barring arrangements. This parliament should be open to proposals to further fine-tune the regulatory framework that might arise from these conversations.

The Hon. John Darley raised concerns about EFTPOS and the possibility that venues may get around laws relating to EFTPOS. The gaming machine regulations already contain specific measures to deal with this matter. An EFTPOS facility can only be offered if the person operating the EFTPOS facility confirms the withdrawal amount with the person obtaining cash from the EFTPOS facility immediately before the amount is withdrawn. Cash may only be obtained directly from a person operating the EFTPOS facility or from a dispenser in the immediate vicinity of the EFTPOS facility, not being a dispenser that forms part of an automatic teller machine.

The Gaming Machine Regulations enshrine the requirement for face-to-face interaction with customers. What the bill seeks to do is to make sure that the customer is face-to-face with an employee who has benefited from recognised training. This training is required under the act to address gaming operations, responsible gaming, problem gambling identification (including automated risk monitoring), and also precommitment. The advanced training includes low level intervention and referral to gambling help services.

The Hon. John Darley, in his amendments, also proposes to oppose red tape reduction amendments that seek to eliminate the approval of gaming machine area layouts by the Liquor and Gambling Commissioner, and I note that both the commissioner and the Independent Gambling Authority have sufficient powers to address any concerns they may have about gaming machine layout without having to rely on any specific approval power.

Other amendments proposed by the Hon. John Darley largely address policy issues that were dealt with in 2013. The government's policy position has not changed from that time and the government intends to oppose the amendments proposed by the Hon. John Darley. I look forward to the committee stage and commend the bill to the council.

Bill read a second time.

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