|
representatives vote 2012-11-29#4
Edited by
Henare Degan
on
2014-10-10 15:53:26
|
Title
Description
The majority voted in favour of [amendments](http://www.openaustralia.org/debate/?id=2012-11-29.56.3) moved by Independent MP [Tony Windsor](http://publicwhip-rails.openaustraliafoundation.org.au/mp.php?mpn=Tony_Windsor&mpc=New%20England&house=representatives). This means that the majority support the amendments and want to integrate them into the bill.Mr Windsor explains that these amendments "relate to the timing of the application of the bill"(Read Mr Windsor's full explanation of his amendments [here](http://www.openaustralia.org/debate/?id=2012-11-29.46.1). ) and would delay the precommitment-ready deadline for electronic gaming machines that is required by the bill._Background to the bill_The [National Gambling Reform Bill 2012](http://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Bills_Legislation/Bills_Search_Results/Result?bId=r4793) was introduced along with the [National Gambling Reform (Related Matters) Bill (No. 1) 2012](http://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Bills_Legislation/Bills_Search_Results/Result?bId=r4794) and the [National Gambling Reform (Related Matters) Bill (No. 2) 2012](http://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Bills_Legislation/Bills_Search_Results/Result?bId=r4795). Together, these bills relate to a national scheme for gaming machines in order to reduce the harms associated with gambling on these machines.According to the [bills digest](http://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Bills_Legislation/bd/bd1213a/13bd051), these bills introduce the following:- from the end of 2013, new electronic gaming machines ('EGMs') either manufactured in, or imported into, Australia be capable of supporting an approved precommitment system- by 2016, EGMs be linked together as part of a state-wide or territory-wide precommitment system, and display electronic warning messages (with extended timelines for smaller venues) and- from 1 May 2013 Automatic Teller Machines (ATMs) located in gaming venues have a $250 daily withdrawal limit.(Read more about the bills in the [bills digest](http://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Bills_Legislation/bd/bd1213a/13bd051) of the National Gambling Reform Bill 2012.)- This division relates to the Policy _[For putting restrictions on gambling](/policies/39)_.
- The majority voted in favour of [amendments](http://www.openaustralia.org/debate/?id=2012-11-29.56.3) moved by Independent MP [Tony Windsor](http://publicwhip-rails.openaustraliafoundation.org.au/mp.php?mpn=Tony_Windsor&mpc=New%20England&house=representatives). This means that the majority support the amendments and want to integrate them into the bill.
- Mr Windsor explains that these amendments "relate to the timing of the application of the bill"(Read Mr Windsor's full explanation of his amendments [here](http://www.openaustralia.org/debate/?id=2012-11-29.46.1). ) and would delay the precommitment-ready deadline for electronic gaming machines that is required by the bill.
- _Background to the bill_
- The [National Gambling Reform Bill 2012](http://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Bills_Legislation/Bills_Search_Results/Result?bId=r4793) was introduced along with the [National Gambling Reform (Related Matters) Bill (No. 1) 2012](http://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Bills_Legislation/Bills_Search_Results/Result?bId=r4794) and the [National Gambling Reform (Related Matters) Bill (No. 2) 2012](http://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Bills_Legislation/Bills_Search_Results/Result?bId=r4795). Together, these bills relate to a national scheme for gaming machines in order to reduce the harms associated with gambling on these machines.
- According to the [bills digest](http://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Bills_Legislation/bd/bd1213a/13bd051), these bills introduce the following:
- - from the end of 2013, new electronic gaming machines ('EGMs') either manufactured in, or imported into, Australia be capable of supporting an approved precommitment system
- - by 2016, EGMs be linked together as part of a state-wide or territory-wide precommitment system, and display electronic warning messages (with extended timelines for smaller venues) and
- - from 1 May 2013 Automatic Teller Machines (ATMs) located in gaming venues have a $250 daily withdrawal limit.(Read more about the bills in the [bills digest](http://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Bills_Legislation/bd/bd1213a/13bd051) of the National Gambling Reform Bill 2012.
- )
- Precommitment involves a gambler setting a loss limit before they commence playing. Independent MP [Andrew Wilkie](http://publicwhip-rails.openaustraliafoundation.org.au/mp.php?mpn=Andrew_Wilkie&mpc=Denison&house=representatives) made the introduction of mandatory precommitment a key part of his agreement to support the minority [Gillard](http://publicwhip-rails.openaustraliafoundation.org.au/mp.php?mpn=Julia_Gillard&mpc=Lalor&house=representatives) Labor Government after the [2010 election](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Australian_federal_election,_2010).(Read more about Mr Wilkie's commitment to introducing precommitment [here](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andrew_Wilkie#Pokies_and_pre-commitment). ) Although the Labor Government originally agreed to introduce mandatory precommitment, these bills limit the reforms to ensuring the EGMs have precommitment _capability_.(Read more about the change in the Labor Government's approach to gambling reform on ABC News [here](http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-10-31/greens-back-pokies-reform-bill/4344746).) There will also be a mandatory precommitment trial, to test its feasibility.
|
|
representatives vote 2012-11-29#4
Edited by
system
on
2014-10-07 16:21:07
|
Title
Description
The majority voted in favour of [http://www.openaustralia.org/debate/?id=2012-11-29.56.3 amendments] moved by Independent MP [http://publicwhip-rails.openaustraliafoundation.org.au/mp.php?mpn=Tony_Windsor&mpc=New%20England&house=representatives Tony Windsor]. This means that the majority support the amendments and want to integrate them into the bill.Mr Windsor explains that these amendments "relate to the timing of the application of the bill"(Read Mr Windsor's full explanation of his amendments [http://www.openaustralia.org/debate/?id=2012-11-29.46.1 here].
) and would delay the precommitment-ready deadline for electronic gaming machines that is required by the bill.''Background to the bill''The [http://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Bills_Legislation/Bills_Search_Results/Result?bId=r4793 National Gambling Reform Bill 2012] was introduced along with the [http://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Bills_Legislation/Bills_Search_Results/Result?bId=r4794 National Gambling Reform (Related Matters) Bill (No. 1) 2012] and the [http://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Bills_Legislation/Bills_Search_Results/Result?bId=r4795 National Gambling Reform (Related Matters) Bill (No. 2) 2012]. Together, these bills relate to a national scheme for gaming machines in order to reduce the harms associated with gambling on these machines.According to the [http://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Bills_Legislation/bd/bd1213a/13bd051 bills digest], these bills introduce the following:* from the end of 2013, new electronic gaming machines ('EGMs') either manufactured in, or imported into, Australia be capable of supporting an approved precommitment system* by 2016, EGMs be linked together as part of a state-wide or territory-wide precommitment system, and display electronic warning messages (with extended timelines for smaller venues) and* from 1 May 2013 Automatic Teller Machines (ATMs) located in gaming venues have a $250 daily withdrawal limit.(Read more about the bills in the [http://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Bills_Legislation/bd/bd1213a/13bd051 bills digest] of the National Gambling Reform Bill 2012.
)Precommitment involves a gambler setting a loss limit before they commence playing. Independent MP [http://publicwhip-rails.openaustraliafoundation.org.au/mp.php?mpn=Andrew_Wilkie&mpc=Denison&house=representatives Andrew Wilkie] made the introduction of mandatory precommitment a key part of his agreement to support the minority [http://publicwhip-rails.openaustraliafoundation.org.au/mp.php?mpn=Julia_Gillard&mpc=Lalor&house=representatives Gillard] Labor Government after the [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Australian_federal_election,_2010 2010 election].(Read more about Mr Wilkie's commitment to introducing precommitment [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andrew_Wilkie#Pokies_and_pre-commitment here].
) Although the Labor Government originally agreed to introduce mandatory precommitment, these bills limit the reforms to ensuring the EGMs have precommitment ''capability''.(Read more about the change in the Labor Government's approach to gambling reform on ABC News [http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-10-31/greens-back-pokies-reform-bill/4344746 here].) There will also be a mandatory precommitment trial, to test its feasibility.- The majority voted in favour of [amendments](http://www.openaustralia.org/debate/?id=2012-11-29.56.3) moved by Independent MP [Tony Windsor](http://publicwhip-rails.openaustraliafoundation.org.au/mp.php?mpn=Tony_Windsor&mpc=New%20England&house=representatives). This means that the majority support the amendments and want to integrate them into the bill.
- Mr Windsor explains that these amendments "relate to the timing of the application of the bill"(Read Mr Windsor's full explanation of his amendments [here](http://www.openaustralia.org/debate/?id=2012-11-29.46.1). ) and would delay the precommitment-ready deadline for electronic gaming machines that is required by the bill.
- _Background to the bill_
- The [National Gambling Reform Bill 2012](http://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Bills_Legislation/Bills_Search_Results/Result?bId=r4793) was introduced along with the [National Gambling Reform (Related Matters) Bill (No. 1) 2012](http://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Bills_Legislation/Bills_Search_Results/Result?bId=r4794) and the [National Gambling Reform (Related Matters) Bill (No. 2) 2012](http://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Bills_Legislation/Bills_Search_Results/Result?bId=r4795). Together, these bills relate to a national scheme for gaming machines in order to reduce the harms associated with gambling on these machines.
- According to the [bills digest](http://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Bills_Legislation/bd/bd1213a/13bd051), these bills introduce the following:
- - from the end of 2013, new electronic gaming machines ('EGMs') either manufactured in, or imported into, Australia be capable of supporting an approved precommitment system
- - by 2016, EGMs be linked together as part of a state-wide or territory-wide precommitment system, and display electronic warning messages (with extended timelines for smaller venues) and
- - from 1 May 2013 Automatic Teller Machines (ATMs) located in gaming venues have a $250 daily withdrawal limit.(Read more about the bills in the [bills digest](http://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Bills_Legislation/bd/bd1213a/13bd051) of the National Gambling Reform Bill 2012.
- )
- Precommitment involves a gambler setting a loss limit before they commence playing. Independent MP [Andrew Wilkie](http://publicwhip-rails.openaustraliafoundation.org.au/mp.php?mpn=Andrew_Wilkie&mpc=Denison&house=representatives) made the introduction of mandatory precommitment a key part of his agreement to support the minority [Gillard](http://publicwhip-rails.openaustraliafoundation.org.au/mp.php?mpn=Julia_Gillard&mpc=Lalor&house=representatives) Labor Government after the [2010 election](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Australian_federal_election,_2010).(Read more about Mr Wilkie's commitment to introducing precommitment [here](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andrew_Wilkie#Pokies_and_pre-commitment). ) Although the Labor Government originally agreed to introduce mandatory precommitment, these bills limit the reforms to ensuring the EGMs have precommitment _capability_.(Read more about the change in the Labor Government's approach to gambling reform on ABC News [here](http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-10-31/greens-back-pokies-reform-bill/4344746).) There will also be a mandatory precommitment trial, to test its feasibility.
|
|
representatives vote 2012-11-29#4
Edited by
system
on
2014-10-07 16:16:53
|
Title
Description
- The majority voted in favour of [http://www.openaustralia.org/debate/?id=2012-11-29.56.3 amendments] moved by Independent MP [http://publicwhip-rails.openaustraliafoundation.org.au/mp.php?mpn=Tony_Windsor&mpc=New%20England&house=representatives Tony Windsor]. This means that the majority support the amendments and want to integrate them into the bill.
Mr Windsor explains that these amendments "relate to the timing of the application of the bill"[1] and would delay the precommitment-ready deadline for electronic gaming machines that is required by the bill.- Mr Windsor explains that these amendments "relate to the timing of the application of the bill"(Read Mr Windsor's full explanation of his amendments [http://www.openaustralia.org/debate/?id=2012-11-29.46.1 here].
) and would delay the precommitment-ready deadline for electronic gaming machines that is required by the bill.
- ''Background to the bill''
- The [http://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Bills_Legislation/Bills_Search_Results/Result?bId=r4793 National Gambling Reform Bill 2012] was introduced along with the [http://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Bills_Legislation/Bills_Search_Results/Result?bId=r4794 National Gambling Reform (Related Matters) Bill (No. 1) 2012] and the [http://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Bills_Legislation/Bills_Search_Results/Result?bId=r4795 National Gambling Reform (Related Matters) Bill (No. 2) 2012]. Together, these bills relate to a national scheme for gaming machines in order to reduce the harms associated with gambling on these machines.
- According to the [http://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Bills_Legislation/bd/bd1213a/13bd051 bills digest], these bills introduce the following:
- * from the end of 2013, new electronic gaming machines ('EGMs') either manufactured in, or imported into, Australia be capable of supporting an approved precommitment system
- * by 2016, EGMs be linked together as part of a state-wide or territory-wide precommitment system, and display electronic warning messages (with extended timelines for smaller venues) and
* from 1 May 2013 Automatic Teller Machines (ATMs) located in gaming venues have a $250 daily withdrawal limit.[2]- * from 1 May 2013 Automatic Teller Machines (ATMs) located in gaming venues have a $250 daily withdrawal limit.(Read more about the bills in the [http://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Bills_Legislation/bd/bd1213a/13bd051 bills digest] of the National Gambling Reform Bill 2012.
)
Precommitment involves a gambler setting a loss limit before they commence playing. Independent MP [http://publicwhip-rails.openaustraliafoundation.org.au/mp.php?mpn=Andrew_Wilkie&mpc=Denison&house=representatives Andrew Wilkie] made the introduction of mandatory precommitment a key part of his agreement to support the minority [http://publicwhip-rails.openaustraliafoundation.org.au/mp.php?mpn=Julia_Gillard&mpc=Lalor&house=representatives Gillard] Labor Government after the [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Australian_federal_election,_2010 2010 election].[3] Although the Labor Government originally agreed to introduce mandatory precommitment, these bills limit the reforms to ensuring the EGMs have precommitment ''capability''.[4] There will also be a mandatory precommitment trial, to test its feasibility.- Precommitment involves a gambler setting a loss limit before they commence playing. Independent MP [http://publicwhip-rails.openaustraliafoundation.org.au/mp.php?mpn=Andrew_Wilkie&mpc=Denison&house=representatives Andrew Wilkie] made the introduction of mandatory precommitment a key part of his agreement to support the minority [http://publicwhip-rails.openaustraliafoundation.org.au/mp.php?mpn=Julia_Gillard&mpc=Lalor&house=representatives Gillard] Labor Government after the [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Australian_federal_election,_2010 2010 election].(Read more about Mr Wilkie's commitment to introducing precommitment [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andrew_Wilkie#Pokies_and_pre-commitment here].
) Although the Labor Government originally agreed to introduce mandatory precommitment, these bills limit the reforms to ensuring the EGMs have precommitment ''capability''.(Read more about the change in the Labor Government's approach to gambling reform on ABC News [http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-10-31/greens-back-pokies-reform-bill/4344746 here].) There will also be a mandatory precommitment trial, to test its feasibility.
''References''* [1] Read Mr Windsor's full explanation of his amendments [http://www.openaustralia.org/debate/?id=2012-11-29.46.1 here].* [2] Read more about the bills in the [http://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Bills_Legislation/bd/bd1213a/13bd051 bills digest] of the National Gambling Reform Bill 2012.* [3] Read more about Mr Wilkie's commitment to introducing precommitment [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andrew_Wilkie#Pokies_and_pre-commitment here].* [4] Read more about the change in the Labor Government's approach to gambling reform on ABC News [http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-10-31/greens-back-pokies-reform-bill/4344746 here].
|
|
representatives vote 2012-11-29#4
Edited by
mackay staff
on
2014-07-31 13:02:46
|
Title
National Gambling Reform Bill 2012 - Consideration in Detail - Delay the deadline for precommitment capability in poker machines- National Gambling Reform Bill 2012 — Consideration in Detail — Delay the deadline for precommitment capability in poker machines
Description
The majority voted in favour of [http://www.openaustralia.org/debate/?id=2012-11-29.56.3 amendments] moved by Independent MP [http://publicwhip-rails.openaustraliafoundation.org.au/mp.php?mpn=Tony_Windsor&mpc=New%20England&house=representatives Tony Windsor]. - The majority voted in favour of [http://www.openaustralia.org/debate/?id=2012-11-29.56.3 amendments] moved by Independent MP [http://publicwhip-rails.openaustraliafoundation.org.au/mp.php?mpn=Tony_Windsor&mpc=New%20England&house=representatives Tony Windsor]. This means that the majority support the amendments and want to integrate them into the bill.
- Mr Windsor explains that these amendments "relate to the timing of the application of the bill"[1] and would delay the precommitment-ready deadline for electronic gaming machines that is required by the bill.
- ''Background to the bill''
- The [http://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Bills_Legislation/Bills_Search_Results/Result?bId=r4793 National Gambling Reform Bill 2012] was introduced along with the [http://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Bills_Legislation/Bills_Search_Results/Result?bId=r4794 National Gambling Reform (Related Matters) Bill (No. 1) 2012] and the [http://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Bills_Legislation/Bills_Search_Results/Result?bId=r4795 National Gambling Reform (Related Matters) Bill (No. 2) 2012]. Together, these bills relate to a national scheme for gaming machines in order to reduce the harms associated with gambling on these machines.
- According to the [http://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Bills_Legislation/bd/bd1213a/13bd051 bills digest], these bills introduce the following:
- * from the end of 2013, new electronic gaming machines ('EGMs') either manufactured in, or imported into, Australia be capable of supporting an approved precommitment system
- * by 2016, EGMs be linked together as part of a state-wide or territory-wide precommitment system, and display electronic warning messages (with extended timelines for smaller venues) and
- * from 1 May 2013 Automatic Teller Machines (ATMs) located in gaming venues have a $250 daily withdrawal limit.[2]
- Precommitment involves a gambler setting a loss limit before they commence playing. Independent MP [http://publicwhip-rails.openaustraliafoundation.org.au/mp.php?mpn=Andrew_Wilkie&mpc=Denison&house=representatives Andrew Wilkie] made the introduction of mandatory precommitment a key part of his agreement to support the minority [http://publicwhip-rails.openaustraliafoundation.org.au/mp.php?mpn=Julia_Gillard&mpc=Lalor&house=representatives Gillard] Labor Government after the [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Australian_federal_election,_2010 2010 election].[3] Although the Labor Government originally agreed to introduce mandatory precommitment, these bills limit the reforms to ensuring the EGMs have precommitment ''capability''.[4] There will also be a mandatory precommitment trial, to test its feasibility.
- ''References''
- * [1] Read Mr Windsor's full explanation of his amendments [http://www.openaustralia.org/debate/?id=2012-11-29.46.1 here].
- * [2] Read more about the bills in the [http://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Bills_Legislation/bd/bd1213a/13bd051 bills digest] of the National Gambling Reform Bill 2012.
- * [3] Read more about Mr Wilkie's commitment to introducing precommitment [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andrew_Wilkie#Pokies_and_pre-commitment here].
- * [4] Read more about the change in the Labor Government's approach to gambling reform on ABC News [http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-10-31/greens-back-pokies-reform-bill/4344746 here].
|
|
representatives vote 2012-11-29#4
Edited by
mackay staff
on
2014-07-31 13:02:03
|
Title
Bills — National Gambling Reform Bill 2012; Consideration in Detail- National Gambling Reform Bill 2012 - Consideration in Detail - Delay the deadline for precommitment capability in poker machines
Description
<p class="speaker">Tony Windsor</p><p>by leave—I move amendments (1) to (13) as circulated in my name:</p><p class="italic">(1) Clause 13, page 16 (line 7), omit "2016", substitute "2018".</p>- The majority voted in favour of [http://www.openaustralia.org/debate/?id=2012-11-29.56.3 amendments] moved by Independent MP [http://publicwhip-rails.openaustraliafoundation.org.au/mp.php?mpn=Tony_Windsor&mpc=New%20England&house=representatives Tony Windsor].
- Mr Windsor explains that these amendments "relate to the timing of the application of the bill"[1] and would delay the precommitment-ready deadline for electronic gaming machines that is required by the bill.
- ''Background to the bill''
- The [http://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Bills_Legislation/Bills_Search_Results/Result?bId=r4793 National Gambling Reform Bill 2012] was introduced along with the [http://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Bills_Legislation/Bills_Search_Results/Result?bId=r4794 National Gambling Reform (Related Matters) Bill (No. 1) 2012] and the [http://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Bills_Legislation/Bills_Search_Results/Result?bId=r4795 National Gambling Reform (Related Matters) Bill (No. 2) 2012]. Together, these bills relate to a national scheme for gaming machines in order to reduce the harms associated with gambling on these machines.
- According to the [http://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Bills_Legislation/bd/bd1213a/13bd051 bills digest], these bills introduce the following:
- * from the end of 2013, new electronic gaming machines ('EGMs') either manufactured in, or imported into, Australia be capable of supporting an approved precommitment system
- * by 2016, EGMs be linked together as part of a state-wide or territory-wide precommitment system, and display electronic warning messages (with extended timelines for smaller venues) and
- * from 1 May 2013 Automatic Teller Machines (ATMs) located in gaming venues have a $250 daily withdrawal limit.[2]
- Precommitment involves a gambler setting a loss limit before they commence playing. Independent MP [http://publicwhip-rails.openaustraliafoundation.org.au/mp.php?mpn=Andrew_Wilkie&mpc=Denison&house=representatives Andrew Wilkie] made the introduction of mandatory precommitment a key part of his agreement to support the minority [http://publicwhip-rails.openaustraliafoundation.org.au/mp.php?mpn=Julia_Gillard&mpc=Lalor&house=representatives Gillard] Labor Government after the [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Australian_federal_election,_2010 2010 election].[3] Although the Labor Government originally agreed to introduce mandatory precommitment, these bills limit the reforms to ensuring the EGMs have precommitment ''capability''.[4] There will also be a mandatory precommitment trial, to test its feasibility.
- ''References''
- * [1] Read Mr Windsor's full explanation of his amendments [http://www.openaustralia.org/debate/?id=2012-11-29.46.1 here].
- * [2] Read more about the bills in the [http://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Bills_Legislation/bd/bd1213a/13bd051 bills digest] of the National Gambling Reform Bill 2012.
- * [3] Read more about Mr Wilkie's commitment to introducing precommitment [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andrew_Wilkie#Pokies_and_pre-commitment here].
- * [4] Read more about the change in the Labor Government's approach to gambling reform on ABC News [http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-10-31/greens-back-pokies-reform-bill/4344746 here].
<p class="italic">(2) Clause 13, page 16 (line 14), omit "2020", substitute "2022".</p><p class="italic">(3) Clause 13, page 16 (line 24), omit "2020", substitute "2022".</p><p class="italic">(4) Clause 13, page 16 (line 26), omit "2020", substitute "2022".</p><p class="italic">(5) Clause 13, page 16 (line 29), omit "2013", substitute "2014".</p><p class="italic">(6) Clause 15, page 17 (line 25), omit "2013", substitute "2014".</p><p class="italic">(7) Clause 15, page 17 (line 28), omit "2013", substitute "2014".</p><p class="italic">(8) Clause 17, page 18 (line 15), omit "2017", substitute "2019".</p><p class="italic">(9) Clause 17, page 18 (line 20), omit "2021", substitute "2023".</p><p class="italic">(10) Clause 17, page 18 (line 29), omit "2021", substitute "2023".</p><p class="italic">(11) Clause 17, page 18 (line 31), omit "2021", substitute "2023".</p><p class="italic">(12) Clause 17, page 19 (line 2), omit "2013", substitute "2014".</p><p class="italic">(13) Clause 51, page 42 (lines 12 to 14), omit paragraph (c), substitute:</p><p class="italic">  (c) the terms and conditions on which the precommitment system would be provided are reasonable including low cost, taking into account the matters prescribed by the regulations.</p><p>I spoke to these amendments earlier on, Deputy Speaker Georganas, so I will not take the time of the House now. I congratulate the member for Denison once again for bringing this issue once again to the House. He has been very passionate in relation to this particular issue. Even though it is probably not totally to his liking in terms of an outcome, there is no doubt in my mind that this issue would not have been addressed in the way it has been and that these amendments and this legislation will be accepted by the community generally. I pay regard to the member for Denison. I would also like to thank the member for Dobell for his assistance with the amendments and working with the various players in terms of trying to get some degree of consensus in relation to the legislation.</p> <p class="speaker">Craig Thomson</p><p>I second those amendments from the member for New England. When I made my contribution earlier, I said that this was always a balancing act between making sure that the club industry was healthy, which I think everyone in this chamber supports, and making sure something happens to assist those people who have a gambling problem. In supporting those amendments from the member for New England, those amendments give additional time to make sure that that balance is right so that clubs and hotels can cope with the introduction of this legislation.</p><p>I would like to make one other observation. Everyone who has made a contribution in this debate has said that there is a problem with gambling. Everyone has said that there are difficulties with the way in which gambling operates in this country. Yet if that is the case then these steps, albeit that they are perhaps not as strong as the member wanted originally, are certainly important steps. If people truly believe that there are problems with gambling, then everyone in this chamber should be supporting this bill and the amendments.</p> <p class="speaker">Adam Bandt</p><p>The Greens will reluctantly be supporting these amendments because it is apparent that that is necessary for the passage of this bill. We started this week with a bill that certainly had some good features and some features that the Greens had been able to negotiate. It is a bill that nonetheless is far less than what is needed to tackle the misery that is caused by the pokies industry in this country.</p><p>During the course of this week the vultures of the pokie industry have circled this place and have made every effort they could to kill this bill and, if not, to try and weaken it. It is unfortunate that there has been some success, but I am very pleased that they have not been able to stand in the way of or kill the bill. We ought to remember that this is an industry that makes machines that we find here on a scale that we do not find in other countries, machines where someone can lose up to $1,200 an hour.</p><p>Many people over many years have put forward some sensible proposals as to how to limit that. We can have $1 bets. That would still allow recreational punters to have a go but limit the problems. That is a bridge too far. We could have mandatory precommitment. Apparently that is a bridge too far. As a result, we will still be left with machines that are able to and in fact are designed to suck as much money as possible out of people who cannot afford it to put into the pockets of the pokies industry. If you look at a map of the areas where pokies are found at their highest concentration, it is almost exactly the same map as areas of social disadvantage in Australia.</p><p>It is disappointing that after this bill leaves this place we will be in a process of trials and then potential future action. We hope that we can keep this on the agenda and see some reform. But as we head towards Christmas it is unfortunate that there will still be families affected because people in their families, who may in fact be the breadwinners, have a gambling problem and we have not taken as strong action as we could have on the day that this parliament rises.</p> <p class="speaker">Kevin Andrews</p><p>I rise to indicate the coalition will not support these amendments. This has been a chaotic process from day 1. These amendments would not even be necessary if the Labor government had properly consulted with the states and territories in the first place, and we would not be discussing this bill if this government respected the primacy of the states and territories in an area which is constitutionally theirs. But instead of doing that, because of some sordid deal entered into with the member for Denison, we are here at the end of a chaotic process that this government has engaged in.</p><p>I say to the honourable members for New England and Dobell that I understand the purport of what they are putting to the House, but the reality is that this is not good legislation, for the reasons that I have outlined at length on other occasions. If they believed what they have said, then they would simply vote against this legislation.</p> <p class="speaker">Jenny Macklin</p><p>The government will be supporting the amendments moved by the member for New England and supported by the member for Dobell. I thank all of the members who are indicating their support for these amendments. We do understand that the legislation has taken some time to get to this point. We support the amendments both to give venues more time and to give manufacturers more time. I thank the member for New England for his contribution.</p> <p class="speaker">Anna Burke</p><p>The question is that the amendments moved by the member for New England be agreed to.</p><p>The House divided. [13:46]</p><p>(The Speaker—Ms Anna Burke)</p><p class="italic"> <i>In division—</i></p> <p class="speaker">Alby Schultz</p><p>Madam Speaker, I rise on a point of order. A number of government members entered the chamber after you issued the order for the doors to be closed. I bring that to your attention. One of them was the—</p> <p class="speaker">Anna Burke</p><p>I thank the member for Hume.</p>
|