Thursday, 24 March 2022

Bills

Gambling and Liquor Legislation Amendment Bill 2022

Second reading

Debate resumed on motion of Ms HORNE:

That this bill be now read a second time.

Ms RYAN (Euroa) (10:05): It is a pleasure to rise this morning to speak on the Gambling and Liquor Legislation Amendment Bill 2022, and it is excellent timing that the minister responsible is also at the table on table duty. I am pleased that she is here to listen to some of this debate on the bill that she has carriage of. The purpose of this bill is to make a range of amendments to the Casino Control Act 1991, the Gambling Regulation Act 2003 and the Liquor Control Reform Act 1998. From the outset I wish to thank the department and the minister’s adviser, Kasey, for providing me with a briefing on the bill. They were very professional in doing so, and I thank them for their help with that.

On first reading this just appeared like a fairly technical bill, and it is in many respects, but one of the things that I did notice in my consultation with stakeholders on this bill is that industry and the various stakeholders who have an interest in this bill were not consulted before it landed in the house, which is quite unusual, I have to say. Generally with these pieces of legislation there is quite extensive consultation with key players, but more than one observed to me that that had not happened and that the first they knew about it was when it was introduced into the Parliament. That leads me to conclude that the manager of government business has perhaps issued an edict to ministers to look for uncomplicated and uncontroversial pieces of legislation and urged them to dust them off and bring them forward to keep the parliamentary agenda going. I think there are good reasons the government has for doing that, given the precarious position they find themselves in in the other chamber and the fact that there is so much internal strife with bullying allegations and the like with Labor MPs quitting the party, which means that the government no longer has guaranteed passage of its legislation upstairs. As a consequence I think generally what we find on the business program—

Mr Fowles: On a point of order, Deputy Speaker, we have strayed a very, very, very long way from the bill indeed, and I would ask you to ask the member at the table to come back to speaking on this bill.

Ms RYAN: On the point of order, Deputy Speaker, I refute that. I have not strayed from the bill. I am discussing the context with which I believe this bill has come to the house, and I will come to the point that I was about to make—

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: I will need to rule before you do that, member for Euroa. The member for Euroa has strayed a little bit from the bill, but I do understand the context that she is trying to make. I ask her to come back to the bill.

Ms RYAN: Thank you, Deputy Speaker. I think when you consider a lot of the problems that we have facing this state at the moment—we have more than 100 000 people on the elective surgery waiting list; we have an ambulance crisis facing the state, with 000 calls going unanswered; we have had a horrific toll from six lockdowns, with severe mental health problems facing Victorians and young people in particular—you have to question in that context why the removing of some obsolete gaming licences is the government’s most pressing priority.

Back to my original point, I think it is quite simply the fact that the government does not actually have control of the upper house. Therefore with so much internal strife it cannot guarantee the passage of legislation that is controversial or does not have broad agreement on both sides of the house. Therefore we are seeing pieces of legislation come through that are not, at first glance, overly technical. Or perhaps it is just that the government is out of ideas; there is that possibility as well.

But this bill is not even the most pressing priority in this portfolio. We have of course just had a royal commission into the casino operator. We have just nine of 33 recommendations thus far that have been implemented from that royal commission, and we know that the government needs to bring forward a second tranche of legislation. In fact I observed to the minister across the chamber when she introduced this bill that this was not the piece of legislation I was expecting. I was actually expecting the second tranche of casino legislation. So the context in which this bill comes to the house is I think an interesting one and should be put on the record.

I was interested, in the minister’s second-reading speech, to see that the government claims that it is leading Australia’s efforts in addressing gambling-related harm because the government has given $153 million to the Victorian Responsible Gambling Foundation. Now, that foundation was actually created by the Liberals and Nationals when we were in government; in fact it was created by the member for Malvern in his role as the Minister for Gaming. At the time there was $150 million invested to combat problem gambling. It was the largest amount in Australian history, and as an entirely independent entity to provide problem gambling services to the community, the foundation was the first of its kind in Australia.

Less than a decade on now we have serious concerns that the Labor Party has actually used that foundation to branch stack. Just last year we heard from IBAC that Labor operatives have siphoned off money from a grant paid to the Somali Australian Council of Victoria by the foundation to potentially branch stack for the Labor Party. I just think it is absolutely scandalous that money that should have gone into helping some of the most vulnerable people in this state has potentially been siphoned off into Labor Party coffers.

A member interjected.

Ms RYAN: No, Minister, this is not disgraceful. This is an issue with the responsible gambling—

Mr Fowles: On a point of order, Deputy Speaker, I fail to see what any of these matters have to do with the bill that is before the house, and I would ask you to ask the member to come back to the subject of this debate.

Ms RYAN: On the point of order, Deputy Speaker, very clearly the minister in her own second-reading speech referred to the fact that the government is leading efforts to combat gambling harm through the responsible gambling foundation. That foundation at the moment is subject to a government inquiry about the activities funded by grants that were paid out through that foundation, and I think it is entirely within the context of this debate to be able to discuss that issue.

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: I have not heard the member for Euroa speak to the bill yet. I do hope she comes back to the bill.

Ms RYAN: Deputy Speaker, as I mentioned, in the minister’s second-reading speech she referred to a record investment that this government has given to the responsible gambling foundation as evidence of the government’s commitment to address problem gambling. I am now referring to the fact that this government, as we speak, has an inquiry underway, which is being undertaken by KPMG, in order to audit those very grants that the foundation pays, because there have been allegations made at IBAC that money that is supposed to help the most vulnerable in our community address problem gambling harm has indeed been siphoned off to groups who have been using that money to branch stack for the Labor Party. I am sorry if those opposite do not like to hear it, but that is a complete and utter scandal. When it occurred in October I called for a thorough and independent review of all of those grants made by the foundation to ensure that no other grants have been used similarly for political purposes. In December the government finally agreed and came out and said that it was holding that review, but we have heard crickets since. The government actually said that that review was expected to wrap up early this year, and I just wish to point out that we still have heard nothing about that. The government may very well claim that it is making a record investment in problem gambling, but whilst that issue hangs over the government’s head it needs to reflect on its record, because it is not one at the moment that is something to be proud of.

Turning to the amendments that this bill makes to the Casino Control Act, clauses 10 to 14 amend section 81AAB of the Casino Control Act to permit the payment of gaming machine winnings by electronic funds transfer. I note that this brings the casino into line with pubs and clubs, which were given this ability in 2017 through amendments to the Gambling Regulation Act. I understand that it is Crown that has raised this as an inconsistency and that the government sees making this change as a red tape reduction for Crown. I do not have a problem with that per se, but again I would point out that this is coming at a time when Crown’s behaviour has been the subject of extreme scrutiny and a royal commission, and I question why this is the government’s legislative priority. As I mentioned earlier, the government is supposed to be bringing forward that second tranche of legislation, with 24 of those 33 amendments still not yet implemented.

The bill also, as I have already mentioned, removes obsolete licences and tidies up the act to remove gaming operator licences, gaming licences and wagering licences, which are now redundant as a result of changes made to the sector in 2012. And I think members of this house, particularly some who have been around for a while, would well recall those reforms, which were made under the Brumby government at the time. Previously the right to acquire, distribute, operate and monitor electronic gaming machines in pubs and clubs existed under licences which were held by both Tabcorp and Tattersall’s, but in April 2008 the government announced that it planned to restructure those licences to be venue led, and that gave venue operators, clubs and hotels the ability to actually buy an entitlement for each EGM that they wanted to operate in their venues. Now, that process, which was actually initiated by the current Premier when he was gaming minister, was a complete and utter disaster, costing taxpayers billions of dollars. The government bungled the auction of those poker machine licences, and in 2011 the Auditor-General actually held a review of that program. The member for Ferntree Gully agrees with me here because he was in the house at that time. The Auditor-General concluded that:

… the project failed to achieve a satisfactory financial outcome and there were serious shortcomings in the project management.

The revenue obtained from the sale of the entitlements was around $3 billion less than the assessed fair market value of these assets.

So if you ever needed an example of the disastrous consequences of Labor’s inability to manage money, then I think this process is it. Just imagine what $3 billion in revenue could have done for this state in building hospitals and funding nurses and paying teachers and investing in ambulances. It was an absolute criminal waste of money. And the AG went on to say that large venue operators, rather than the community, were actually the beneficiaries of that windfall gain.

This bill also makes some amendments to the requirements of the wagering and betting licence by revoking the current fixed-term standard of 12 years. That licence currently is held by Tabcorp, and it expires in August 2024. The licence gives Tabcorp the right to conduct parimutuel and fixed-odds betting and to operate the only off-course retail network in Victoria. And I dare say that a number of my colleagues are perhaps frequent users of that. Certainly the member for Gippsland East does not mind the odd flutter—

Mr T Bull: Occasional.

Ms RYAN: The odd occasional flutter. Under the conditions of the licence a share of the revenue from the wagering and betting that is conducted under the licence is paid to the Victorian Racing Industry Fund, and I have no doubt that that is the justification the member from Gippsland East gives—that he is strongly supporting the racing industry—

Mr T Bull interjected.

Ms RYAN: and supporting the thoroughbred, the harness and the greyhound industries. But the amendments that we have in the bill before the house are to enable the minister to actually determine the term of the wagering and betting licence and to specify the term of that licence. So expressions of interest for the licence post 2024 have already closed, and I suspect that this change is about providing some legislative certainty when the government takes that process to market. There is a belief that the government is going to seek to create more than one licence here and also to extend the term of this licence in order to maximise its profit.

I have to say, considering Labor’s history in this space, I do lack the confidence that they will get it right, and I think it is very clear that the government is scrambling for cash here. We have seen them make a number of changes in recent weeks which are clearly about inflating the revenue that they get from these licences, and I will touch on a couple more of those. One in this bill is spelled out in clause 19, which is the current monitoring licence. This actually allows for the monitoring licence to provide technical support and services to electronic gaming machines. That licence is currently held by Intralot, but the government was quite open in acknowledging that this change is about making that licence more lucrative and therefore more competitive when it expires in 2027. Currently the ability to provide those services is prohibited under legislation, and the government argues that Intralot’s ability to provide these additional services is going to bring them into line with their operations in WA.

To my point, I suppose, about the government seeking additional revenue and more cash through these licences, we have recently seen other changes, such as the change which is about to take place in Victoria’s keno licence, which typically under the last licence has been held by Tabcorp but is about to become a dual licence with two authorised providers. I think it was quite a surprise, shall we say, that the government awarded one of those licences to Lottoland, given the significant controversy that surrounds that company. For starters, the company is actually registered in the tax haven of Gibraltar, so I do not know that the government is necessarily putting Victoria’s interests at the centre here. Secondly, we saw that the federal Parliament passed legislation to ban its products, which are not lottos but rather jackpot competitions that involve betting on the outcome of major lotteries. There has been quite a degree of commentary from stakeholders like the Australian Lottery and Newsagents Association, which said that it believes that that kind of betting confuses consumers and damages newsagents’ businesses, which of course we all have in our strip shopping centres or our main towns—they are small businesses, generally family owned—but also that that kind of betting is irresponsible and harmful. I note that the company is now offering betting based on numbers determined by financial markets. I think that decision by the government to award it one of Victoria’s keno licences and also to take those licences online has been met with quite a degree of scepticism from many people within the industry, and people will be watching that very, very closely.

There is also of course the change which we saw last Friday where the minister gazetted extra numbers to Oz Lotto, which dramatically decreases people’s chances of winning—

Ms Horne interjected.

Ms RYAN: Well, no, Minister. It is a national lottery. Other states need to sign off on it, but Victoria holds the licence under the public lotteries licence in Victoria. It is your decision—

Ms Horne interjected.

Ms RYAN: In Victoria it is your decision. It is the minister’s decision to change that draw. It is absolutely the minister’s decision. The minister has gazetted it, and she has in the process decreased people’s chances of winning. But of course what it does is it leads to bigger jackpots, which drives ticket sales and as a consequence it delivers more revenue to the state and more tax paid to the government. So we will watch these changes very closely, because it is quite clear that the government is making significant amendments to these licences in order to bolster their bottom line—because, quite frankly, they are out of money.

One aspect of this bill that I do welcome is the decision to lift the threshold for the minor gaming permit from $5000 to $20 000. I think all of us have Lions and Rotary clubs, CFA brigades, SES brigades, Scouts, different sporting clubs and cultural organisations in our electorates, and they all work incredibly hard to raise funds whether for charitable causes, equipment or the like. The ability for a declared community or charitable organisation to conduct raffles without having to obtain a permit if the value of those prizes does not exceed $20 000 is a good thing. It is a small change in the scheme of things, but it will mean a lot to those small community organisations and sports clubs, which are generally the ones applying for these kinds of minor gaming permits. Those organisations are very much the fabric of our communities, and they should be supported. Making them go through hoops when they are relatively low risk is illogical. The current fee for a minor gaming permit for a raffle or a fundraising event is $26.20, and last year I was interested to note that the Victorian Commission for Gambling and Liquor Regulation issued 565 permits for minor gaming activities, which collected a grand total of $24 000 in licence fees. So it is not a big hit to the government’s bottom line here to be making a small concession which will mean a lot to volunteers and community organisations on the ground.

There are also a few harm reduction measures spelt out in this bill. Clauses 136 to 138 ban bingo and lucky envelope sales online, which I think is a sensible change. Clauses 133 to 135 also allow unpaid prize money to be claimed for up to 12 months rather than just six. Certainly if you are a punter and you may have forgotten to check that ticket, no doubt that will be welcomed.

There is one clause that I wish to flag some concerns over, and that is clause 144, which introduces an offence for a provider if they permit a minor to gamble, regardless of whether they did so knowingly. I think my concern goes to that aspect which is whether or not they did so knowingly. Industry have raised some concerns with me about this, and I have no doubt that now that they have a full copy of the bill, they will probably do similar with the government. But their view is that that is akin to a 17-year-old going into a Woolworths, shall we say, buying a six pack of beer and Lion Nathan or CUB receiving a fine for that minor being able to buy alcohol. I think it is all very well and good if a fine is going to apply to Tabcorp as a licence-holder for allowing someone to bet in one of their own venues when they are under-age, but it is a bit rich to be saying to the provider of the licence, ‘You’re going to be hit with a fine even if a 17-year-old walks into a venue that you have no control over and you do not own and lays a bet. Because you provide the service, you are going to be fined’. That is probably a bridge too far. I am not entirely sure why the government has chosen to do that. But I do flag that that is something that I will be looking at further between houses.

Finally, the government has also made some changes in this bill to the Liquor Control Reform Act 1998. Members of the house will recall that the government overhauled the Liquor Control Reform Act last year, which sought to do a number of things. Among them was to provide stronger regulation around the sale of alcohol online. Now, it seems that there has been an oversight in how that bill was drafted, in that orders placed online do not capture other methods of ordering or delivering alcohol—that is, the government informs me that there are some who still make their orders by fax machine. I would not have thought there were many, but apparently there are some. Of course there are people who also place their orders by mail or over the phone, and so there are substantial changes through here to change the references to ‘orders placed online’ with an ‘off-premise request’ to make it clear.

Mr Rowswell: Did we deal with this recently?

Ms RYAN: We did deal with this recently, member for Sandringham, but it seems that this is one area where the government had an oversight. I do appreciate the changes to the liquor act were quite extensive and took a long time to arrive at. I think industry were surprised when this bill landed in the house, because they were not aware that the government had intended to broaden the scope of the legislation. But we will again continue our conversations with industry and consider our position before this bill arrives in the upper house.

Again, I would reflect on the fact that the government introduced this bill largely as a bit of a rats and mice tidy up of existing legislation because they thought that it would be uncontroversial and there were not many issues with it. I flag that there are potentially a couple of issues with it that we will be considering as this bill moves forward to the upper house. In concluding, I just want to thank the industry stakeholders who have engaged with us in good faith, as they always do, to help inform our position on this legislation.

Ms EDWARDS (Bendigo West) (10:30): I am very pleased to also rise to make a contribution on the Gambling and Liquor Legislation Amendment Bill 2022. I will commence my contribution by just saying that the member for Euroa in her contribution seemed to think that this legislative priority of the government was somehow surrounded by a ridiculous conspiracy theory, which is something that the Liberals and Nationals seem to have indulged in quite a lot lately—these bizarre conspiracy theories about why legislation is before the house. The legislation is before the house because it is an important piece of legislation that is about preventing gambling harm, and that is the bottom line. We want to make sure that we improve outcomes for people who have gambling problems. I thank the minister who was at the table just before, the Minister for Consumer Affairs, Gaming and Liquor Regulation, for bringing this legislation to the house.

The member for Euroa also made some references to the VRGF, the Victorian Responsible Gambling Foundation. I have been a member of that board since 2016, and one of the great pleasures in my life is to sit on that board with some very, very effective people who do some great work. That board and that foundation have changed so much since they were first established. It is not just a mouthpiece; it is now a considerable research and policy delivering organisation. The member for Euroa also made some allegations and insinuations about the VRGF in relation to IBAC. They are completely wrong and it is a disgraceful attack on an organisation that does outstanding work supporting people at risk of gambling harm. Reflecting on the foundation in that way has no basis in fact, and her insinuations are a reflection of what the Liberals and Nationals really think about the VRGF. The VRGF has followed all protocols in the allocation of grants, and I can stand here and say that with my hand on my heart, because I know it for a fact.

This legislation is brought to the house, as always by this government, within the framework of always having a mind to reducing harm from gambling and to preventing gambling harm. As the member for Euroa mentioned, in the minister’s second-reading speech certainly she referred to the fact that addressing gambling harm is something that this government is very proud of and that we have delivered over $153 million over four years with our mandate to reduce the prevalence and severity of gambling-related harm. This of course is Australia’s largest commitment to addressing problem gambling.

The bill builds on the work that the government has already done in this space by introducing more legislation around further harm minimisation measures and improving the regulatory framework for gambling in Victoria. One of the areas that I am particularly interested in in this bill is that it reduces the risk of gambling-related harm by prohibiting online minor gambling activities, including bingo, fundraising events and lucky envelopes. I will come back to that in a moment, but currently these are not permitted under separate largely federal legislation. But the Gambling Regulation Act 2003 is still very unclear on this. As a result, people may think that these are allowed, and we all find ourselves in a situation where new licence applications are being made that cannot be granted, so the changes will give greater clarity to this.

I want to again refer to the VRGF, because the work that they do is outstanding, and I want to thank the CEO Shane Lucas and our board chair Tass Mousaferiadis. Just recently a new deputy chair has come on board to support the organisation and two new board members, one being Zana Bytheway, who is the executive director of JobWatch, and also Ms Hosseini, who is a passionate campaigner for multiculturalism, human rights, social justice and adolescent health and wellbeing. These two new board members will make a huge difference to the board, and I am sure that they will be committed to giving their time and energy to the prevention of gambling harm.

Within the organisation there is a great learning and professional development program. Its aim is to strengthen the skills of Gambler’s Help professionals and others who work with people affected by gambling, and it is informed by the needs and feedback of counsellors, community educators and venue support workers from our mainstream, in-language and First Nations gambling awareness programs. The foundation also collaborates with other sectors in providing and receiving training so we can deliver more holistic services.

The reason I was particularly interested in minor gaming such as bingo, lucky envelopes and fundraising events being prohibited online is that online gambling has become a significant issue. During the pandemic when we were in lockdowns the closure of a range of businesses in response to that COVID-19 pandemic meant that many Victorians who were required to stay at home for an extended period looked to fill a void in their lives. So the foundation has anticipated an increase in online gambling, and there is quite a bit of research being done in that space right now. We think that we will see scenarios where people gambling online has significantly increased. It was a stressful time for many people, and they sought an escape in a new activity. That might have been to take up gambling after even maybe not having been a gambler for a very long time. Online gambling is one of the riskier types of gambling because it is easy to bet and it is easy to lose a lot of money very quickly. One of the things about online gambling of course is that it is hidden away. It is tucked away in people’s living rooms, in their lounge rooms and, for younger men in particular, in their private bedrooms. It is a form of gambling that is not seen, but the impact and the devastation and the damage that can be done is very, very significant.

I just wanted to give some data in relation to that if I can. Online gambling websites and apps are growing in popularity, especially for betting on sports and racing. About one in five adults bet online, which is 27.6 per cent of Victoria’s gambling population. This data is coming from an online gambling survey, a health study that was done in 2018–19, even before the pandemic. An increased proportion of Victorian sports betters are using the internet to place bets on activities like the AFL, cricket and soccer, and of course betting on horse, harness and greyhound racing online has also increased. Other online activities, though, which also can lead to increased gambling and increased harm, are buying scratch and lotto tickets, playing keno, betting on casino table games like blackjack, roulette and poker, buying raffle tickets or entering sweeps or other competitions, and betting on fantasy sports. On average people who gamble online participate in a significantly higher number of gambling activities than their counterparts.

We know that this bill will make a big difference. In contrast I think to where we were some years ago in relation to impacts of gambling harm. We have moved so far forward, particularly with a very strong legislative agenda, including banning wagering service providers from offering credit vouchers or other rewards to an account holder, stopping operators from providing complementary or free bets on the condition that account holders can only use the winnings to continue to bet rather than giving customers an option to withdraw the funds, requiring customers to opt in to receive direct marketing from a wagering service provider, providing consumers with simple and easy-to-use tools to set limits on the amount of money that can be deposited into their betting accounts and ensuring consumers can easily close their betting account if they choose to do so while also restricting gambling providers from offering credit or other rewards to encourage consumers to keep their betting account open. These measures have been introduced by this government in agreement many times with the federal government as we committed to the national consumer protection framework for online wagering. These were Australian-first changes, and we will continue to make sure that our government is keeping an eye out for any ways we can reduce gambling harm and can support prevention of gambling harm.

We know the impact of that on families; we know the impact on individuals. Victoria was the first state to sign up to the national framework because it offered a greater protection to people who gamble online and it gave them practical steps to better manage their gambling. I commend this bill to the house.

Mr Wakeling interjected.

Mr ROWSWELL (Sandringham) (10:40): Thank you, member for Ferntree Gully, for your encouragement. Now, on face value the Gambling and Liquor Legislation Amendment Bill 2022 is something that I and many colleagues should at least have some interest in, just by virtue of the title of it, Gambling and Liquor Legislation Amendment Bill—if not an interest, maybe experience in. Thank goodness we are far from prohibition days and we can actually talk about things that are relevant to our modern day.

I am interested to hear, following my contribution today, the contribution from my colleague the member for Mornington, following on from the member for Euroa, the Shadow Minister for Gaming and Liquor Regulation, who made an outstanding contribution, in my view, to this debate. I would point out that the member for Euroa mentioned that in her consultation with stakeholders in relation to this bill she identified that there was a significant lack of consultation with industry and with stakeholders in relation to this matter, which was surprising to her. I would just point out that in my conversations with the industry that covers, that encompasses, gambling and liquor my observation has been that perhaps not in all but in many cases that particular industry does not necessarily sit idly by waiting for government to lead in the regulatory and legislative space. They themselves recognise the social licence, the social pact, that they have with the communities in which they operate, and they do their level best to get ahead of the game, sometimes well ahead of government regulation or legislation.

The member for Euroa also pointed out the fact that it is interesting that this bill has been raised at this point in time, because it was not so long ago that there was another bill in this place that dealt with liquor licensing. As the member for Euroa pointed out, this bill is largely non-controversial in its nature, and I concur with the member for Euroa’s reflection that that is perhaps a comment on the government’s decision to introduce bills to this place which are non-controversial in nature, given the current state of affairs in the other place.

Deputy Speaker, as you pointed out in your contribution just prior to mine, this bill and the purpose of this bill cover off a number of matters. It seeks to amend the Casino Control Act 1991 to permit casino licence-holders to pay winnings via electronic funds transfer in line with the current regulations that apply to clubs and hotels. It seeks to amend the Gambling Regulation Act 2003 to remove obsolete provisions and references, such as chapter 7 of the Gambling Regulation Act, due to discrepancies with commonwealth legislation and a 2012 gaming restructuring. It provides more flexibility for the government to alter the requirements of a wagering and betting licence by revoking the current fixed-term standard of 12 years. It allows the monitoring licensee, currently Intralot, to provide technical services for gaming machines and equipment in a bid to make the licence more lucrative and align with similar jurisdictions. It makes changes to requirements for unpaid jackpot funds to ensure players’ funds are returned and ensures unpaid jackpot funds are allocated to linked jackpots. Later in my contribution I will just draw upon some of the precise clauses within the bill that refer to that. It increases the requirements for a minor gaming permit from $5000 to $20 000, and I will also speak further to that point. It bans bingo and lucky envelopes from being conducted or sold online, something which we agree with. It increases the holding of unpaid prizes by wagering and betting, keno and public lottery licensees from six months to 12. And further, it amends the Liquor Control Reform Act 1998 to remove obsolete provisions and references; authorise certain licence categories to supply liquor through all forms of remote ordering; amend the online-only vendor packaged liquor licence category; and extend measures introduced by the liquor amendment act relating to a state of emergency in the new pandemic legislation, and that is something which I will also address momentarily.

Specifically in relation to clause 142, which seeks to substitute $5000 with $20 000 or increase the threshold to $20 000 for the minor gaming permit system, which in fact cuts red tape for charitable organisations and sporting clubs, we agree with that. We like that; we agree with it. I think of the many clubs and associations in my own constituency who heavily rely upon fundraising means, whether it be sporting clubs, footy clubs, hockey clubs, cricket clubs or local Lions clubs. Speaking of Lions, I was inducted as a new member of Lions just yesterday. For any of my parliamentary colleagues in the chamber at the moment, if you are not a member of the Lions club of the Victorian Parliament, I highly recommend it.

Mr Fowles interjected.

Mr ROWSWELL: I do actually, member for Burwood. I highly recommend it. It is something that you should consider and I commend to you. But Lions clubs rely upon fundraising, as do Rotary clubs and other organisations, so increasing that threshold for minor gaming permits from $5000 to $20 000 just makes a lot of sense. It enables clubs to get on with the business of fundraising to improve lives and improve opportunities for locals in communities right around the state.

Clauses 128 to 132 deal with unpaid jackpot and linked jackpot funds. We also think that these are sensible and good changes. Clauses 133 to 135 allow unpaid prize money to be claimed for up to 12 months rather than six months. Once again, we think that that is a fair thing. We think it is a sensible thing and a good thing.

In relation to clause 144, it means that a provider commits an offence by permitting a minor to gamble regardless of whether they did so knowingly. We do have concerns about that and we, as the member for Euroa mentioned, will closely monitor the implementation of that because concerns have been raised with us on behalf of the industry specifically in relation to that clause, and rightly so. If a provider—for example, Tabcorp or another provider—does not manage a venue, does not run a venue, does not operate a venue, is it fair, is it just, for them to be held responsible for permitting a minor to gamble, regardless of whether they did so knowingly? It is a valid question to ask. It is one that we pose in good faith to the government and those charged with overseeing the implementation of this legislation, and I once again indicate that we will be closely observing the implementation of that particular clause.

Finally, clauses 150 to 157 replace the references to orders placed online with off-premise requests to authorise general licensees to supply liquor not only online but by other communications methods. I remember just very recently speaking in this place about those particular reforms. Clearly this is an admission by the government that they did not necessarily get that 100 per cent right at the time and now come into this place seeking to change it. We think it is a sensible change, but it does potentially draw people’s attention to the fact that we could have got it right in the first place not so long ago. It has been wonderful to contribute on this bill, and I look forward to other contributions as well.

Ms SULEYMAN (St Albans) (10:50): I too rise today to speak on the Gambling and Liquor Legislation Amendment Bill 2022, and I echo the sentiments made by you, Deputy Speaker, in your contribution previously in relation to this bill. We all know how important it is in our state’s legislation to stay relevant, up to date, effective and in line with today’s rapidly changing society. This bill reflects some big changes over recent years in the way people purchase and consume not only with gambling but also alcohol. I do just want to talk a little bit about alcohol and I suppose the change in consumer behaviour in the last two years, in particular during COVID. We saw a new wave, with alcohol being delivered straight to your front door, and this service became quite a popular and convenient way of buying alcohol during COVID, an effective and a fast way. It is great to see that businesses were able to adjust to and overcome the challenges during COVID in the last two years and adopt these new and innovative business models to be able to deliver to consumers.

However, such changes mean that we need to make sure that consumers and businesses have proper guidelines in place so we do not see or hear stories of this system being abused and so it does operate safely and appropriately in the interests of our local communities. So this bill seeks to make changes to tidy up and improve existing gambling and liquor legislation.

It is also quite exciting to see new ways of doing business evolve and develop in Victoria, and this legislation will apply standard conditions to online orders and impose obligations and offences relating to online supply. I think we all know that is common sense. This is important so that legislation remains current and reflective of the technology of the day. With this bill we are helping to support the innovative business practices that have been developed but also ensuring that these practices have the proper conditions and regulations in place. These reforms will increase competition and most importantly reduce red tape and improve operation of some legislative provisions.

The bill makes an important change to the arrangements for setting the term of future wagering and betting licences. We know for community organisations and charities, holding raffles—and we have heard this in previous contributions—provides so much. Some of these fundraising efforts are quite critical to organisations, whether it is a local senior citizens group, a Lions club, Rotary, sporting clubs or a multicultural community group. Fundraising is sometimes the only source of critical income and financial support for that organisation, and that is why we are making important changes like cutting the red tape for these organisations and increasing the threshold required to have a permit for a raffle. I know with my senior citizens group that at times in the past when they were raising more than $5000 it was an enormous task for my senior citizens to actually go through the process of obtaining a permit and making sure that they adhered to the regulations. It is good to see that this threshold will now rise to $20 000. I think that is sensible, and I think it is important for community organisations, in particular in my electorate, where at most of these organisations English is a second language. I think this is an important change.

This bill will also extend the time line for payment of unclaimed prizes to the Treasurer. Additionally it will seek to reduce the risk of gambling-related harm by prohibiting online minor gambling activities including bingo, fundraising events and lucky envelopes. Currently these are not permitted under separate, largely federal, legislation, but the Gambling Regulation Act 2003 is still unclear on this. As a result some individuals may believe that these activities are still allowed and permitted, so these changes will provide greater clarity for the industry as a whole. Amendments in this bill will improve the cross-ownership provisions restricting the monitoring licensee from also providing gaming machine technical services to venue operators.

As we know, and most people will know, clearly gambling has for some people a very negative impact on the local community, on their families and on their communities. Unfortunately my municipality of Brimbank has the highest losses from electronic gambling machines of any LGA in Victoria. Over the last 10 years it is estimated that over $1.3 billion has been lost by players in that area alone. I know that our government in the last six years have done tremendous work in providing support to problem gamblers and their families and making sure that there have been changes made to electronic gambling machines across the LGA as well, and we continue to do as much as we can in relation to supporting those who are problem gamblers and families that come into harm’s way in relation to this. There is no doubt that this bill ensures that the current legislation is consistent with existing arrangements in the industry.

As many would know, before I entered this place and before I began politics I actually worked in the gambling industry. I have seen firsthand the negative sides of the industry but also the positive sides of the industry. As I said, in my municipality of Brimbank you see an enormous adverse effect on families, but you also see the positive stories in relation to employment opportunities, the chain reaction of local economies and in particular local community sporting clubs who have a gaming venue that gives back to the community and invests in sport. So it is not always negative for the community, and there always needs to be a balance. That is my view in relation to the industry, where we are providing appropriate measures for those who are in harm’s way in relation to gambling but we are also looking at the positive effect that the hospitality and gambling industry has in local communities and in fact in Victoria. I have spoken previously in relation to the positive impacts the industry has on Victoria, whether it is tourism or whether it is local businesses that also are part of that chain, a chain that provides support and growth in our state.

I think this bill really is an opportunity to clean up some of the red tape, but also I would like to say: if you do have problems with gambling or liquor, please reach out to those support services in your local area. There are helplines where you can get assistance and support. Our government is committed to backing our local community groups and small businesses as we recover from the global pandemic. This bill is a good bill that covers key industries, slashing red tape and most of all making sure the current legislation meets the demands of today. With that I commend the bill to the house.

Mr MORRIS (Mornington) (11:00): The Gambling and Liquor Legislation Amendment Bill 2022: I must say we have had some pieces of legislation that were less inspiring than others, but this one would have to be right up there on the list in terms of the sort of housekeeping that we can afford to wave through without a great deal of debate. There are a couple of nuggets in it that I think are worthwhile, but largely it is about housekeeping measures, about removing redundant pieces of legislation or legislation that is dealt with elsewhere—others have mentioned the commonwealth. This is not exactly groundbreaking stuff, but as I say, there are probably one or two important points in it.

Essentially it is amending the Casino Control Act 1991 to permit casino operators to pay winners by EFT. It is probably about 25 years too late, but at least it is happening. It amends the Gambling Regulation Act 2003—there we go, obsolete provisions on interactive gaming and gaming machine jackpots removed. As others have mentioned, there is an increase in the time for dealing with unclaimed prizes from six to 12 months—I think that is reasonable. And something I certainly strongly support: prohibiting online community and charitable gaming. There are some changes to the Liquor Control Reform Act 1998—changes that probably should have been made last year when the initial changes to remote ordering were made, but now we are finally getting around to it.

I would suggest that the fact that the Minister for Consumer Affairs, Gaming and Liquor Regulation’s second-reading speech takes until the third paragraph on the second page to actually get into what the bill is about after a series of claims about what the government has done indicates that there is really not a lot of substance in this bill. Others have reflected on the quality of the legislation coming through, the quality of the legislative pipeline. I think I probably agree with those comments. One point in the minister’s second-reading speech that caught my eye was the claim that Victoria is the Australian jurisdiction with the lowest density of gaming machines, except of course for Western Australia, which does not permit them outside the casino—and I hope to have the opportunity to come back to that in a few minutes.

There are some changes, as I mentioned, to the provisions with regard to charitable institutions, and they are indeed sensible changes. The first is the banning of online gambling with regard to bingo and lucky envelope sales. That is a very sensible measure. I cannot remember who it was—it may have been the Deputy Speaker—who talked about the opportunity for online gambling to do harm. Effectively online gambling occurs in an unrestrained environment, so there are not the safeguards that you have at the casino or even at any pokie facility. Those safeguards are not there, and people can get themselves into serious trouble very, very quickly, so I welcome that.

I also welcome the change in terms of the minor gaming permit system, upping the quantum there from $5000 to $20 000. It is hard enough for community organisations to raise funds either for their own purposes or to do good works in the community, as many do. The constraint that has been there of requiring a permit and the significant paperwork that goes with that and having a ceiling of $5000 has made it almost not worthwhile running a raffle or a similar event. Increasing it to $20 000 is a useful change.

The bill also makes some changes with regard to the Liquor Control Reform Act 1998. As I mentioned earlier there were some changes—last year, if I recall correctly—which were intended to counteract what was perceived as the impact of COVID and the increased demand for home deliveries and the risk particularly of the supplies falling into the hands of those who should not have them. This bill now extends that to other forms of remote ordering. As the Minister for Consumer Affairs, Gaming and Liquor Regulation said in the second-reading speech:

… telephone, mail order, facsimile and other forms of electronic communication.

It also recognises that those other forms of remote ordering were not captured in the initial amendments, and I have got to say I do find that rather surprising. I know many, many, many years ago I worked for some time, probably a matter of months, in a family-owned liquor business that did home deliveries, and I have got to say I was always entertained but never surprised by the extent to which people not that many years younger than I was but certainly too young to be ordering alcohol would go to try to have us—I do not think we actually ever failed in our duty—deliver alcohol to under-age kids. That was back in the 1970s, so this is not exactly a new issue. Hopefully the changes that are proposed in this bill will do something about that particular problem.

The member for St Albans talked a few minutes ago about the issue with the losses from poker machines in Brimbank city, and that is something that has been on my radar for a while. But it is not just Brimbank, of course, it is a range of municipalities across the state. Brimbank, on the most recent figures, the 2021 figures, had a gross spend of over $92 million and $552 per adult. The City of Greater Dandenong had $532 per adult and—with a lower population—$73 million in round terms.

I am certainly not a wowser. I have no problem with electronic gaming machines, but I do have a problem where you have municipalities such as these where they are unfortunately still very high ranking in terms of socio-economic disadvantage. Brimbank is currently ranked third in the state. Greater Dandenong is ranked second in the state. You go a little bit further down the list. Latrobe city has a lower expenditure per capita, down to $435, but is ranked fourth. Mildura, ranked fifth in socio-economic disadvantage, has a figure of $399 per adult. Now, with regard to both Mildura and Latrobe, one would expect that there is an element of tourism in there, people on holiday wanting to go out and enjoy themselves, so the numbers per adult may be inflated, but the fact is that we have numbers that high with areas of such significant disadvantage—and we still do, there is nothing new about this.

So in terms of the rankings it is Brimbank first, Greater Dandenong second, then you go to Warrnambool, Greater Shepparton and Maribyrnong. The difference with those is that they are way down the list in terms of socio-economic disadvantage. Obviously we are not going to solve these issues today, but we have licence renewals coming up in the not-too-distant future, and I think we have a problem here that we have failed to address. We may have, as the minister said, the lowest density in the country, and that is a good thing to have, but we have pockets where we have significant problems and pockets where those who can probably least afford to entertain themselves in this way do.

As I mentioned at the start, there is lots of housekeeping in this bill. There is lots of stuff that needs to be done that the Parliament needs to do, but there are one or two good nuggets in it, and certainly I have no problem, as the member for Euroa indicated, with any of the changes.

Mr TAK (Clarinda) (11:10): I am delighted to rise today to speak on the Gambling and Liquor Legislation Amendment Bill 2022. It was only late last year that we were here debating some related amendments implementing recommendations of the Royal Commission into the Casino Operator and Licence, strengthening regulatory oversight of the casino and establishing the Victorian Gambling and Casino Control Commission. Since then, I understand that the inaugural chair of the commission has been appointed and the commission is well focused on providing stronger, more targeted regulation of Victoria’s casino and oversight of all gambling and gaming activity in Victoria. The commission also has greater oversight of gambling harms and minimisation measures, with a dedicated casino division and commissioner focused solely on the casino operator, which is very important.

This government has shown its commitment to the regulation of gambling-regulated activity, and it has shown its commitment to responsible gambling and harm minimisation. This is important for many of my constituents. Gambling and responsible gambling remains a serious challenge in my electorate. This was highlighted during the royal commission, with submissions from many of my constituents, and I will talk about the organisations that are involved and that receive funding from our government to solve that problem, many of the community organisations in my electorate. It is extremely important for our community that gambling and relevant institutions are well regulated and that responsible gambling programs are well funded and well promoted. Once again, I would like to talk about that a little bit later.

This bill will make amendments to three acts. The purposes of these amendments are outlined in part 1 of the bill and include the following: that the Casino Control Act 1991 be amended to permit casino operators to pay winnings by electronic funds transfer (EFT) as well as some other miscellaneous amendments to remove obsolete provisions and references. Section 13(2) of the amendments specifies that a casino operator must at the request of a person pay out any winnings or accumulated credit from a gambling machine to the person by electronic funds transfer, and if at least $2000 is to be transferred, to ensure that those funds are not transferred until 24 hours after that request. This comes with a penalty of 50 penalty units for breaches. This will be inserted into the Casino Control Act after section 81AAB.

There are also a significant number of amendments to the Gambling Regulation Act 2003 to achieve several purposes, and I would like to run through these here: firstly, to provide for the terms of the wagering and betting licence to be specified in the licence; secondly, to make changes to the treatment of unpaid jackpot funds held by the venue operator; and thirdly, to clarify provisions for payment of gaming machine winnings over $2000 by EFT—similar to the changes under the casino act. Further, the amendments will remove the restriction that prevents an associate, subsidiary or related body corporate of the monitoring licensee from providing gaming machine technical services to venue operators; repeal the redundant gaming operator and wagering licence provisions; repeal the interactive gambling licence provisions in chapter 7 of the Gambling Regulation Act 2003; prohibit bingo, fundraising events and lucky envelopes from being conducted online; and increase the monetary threshold for the requirement to obtain a permit. This is a comprehensive list of amendments, and there are a few more here.

But I would just like to touch on what I said before about the community organisations. We see the importance of the community organisations in our communities to combat gambling-related harm. There are a significant number of community organisations in the electorate of Clarinda working hard to support community members affected by gambling. One such organisation is the Australian Vietnamese Women’s Association, which has their office in Springvale on Parsons Avenue. They also made a compelling submission to the royal commission, and I thank gambling counsellor Ai Nguyen for making the submission and for the important work helping in their gambling counselling program. Last year I was very happy to see the Victorian Responsible Gambling Foundation award $400 000 to the association for two important projects that aim to prevent and reduce the incarceration rates related to gambling harms in the Vietnamese community. I have heard from the AVWA about the effect on women experiencing gambling harm related to the behaviour of their partners and the work to challenge the belief that Vietnamese women are over-represented in Victorian prisons because of their own gambling. They run some very important initiatives delivered to women with preschool-aged children as well awareness-raising activities that increase awareness of gambling harm amongst socially isolated and disengaged women in the Vietnamese community.

The Cambodian Association of Victoria are doing some really important work in preventing and reducing gambling harm among those most at risk. One of their most recent projects was working in collaboration with the Cambodian Buddhist temples in my electorate. I know that this was a really important initiative for many people to learn and share about gambling-related harm in our community. This harm extends well past financial difficulty. We have seen through this project that there is a strong connection with family violence and also other serious harm, including isolation in the community. These projects are extremely important for the health and wellbeing of our community.

There are a host of other organisations working on this issue. South-East Monash Legal Service in Springvale are doing some important work in this space and have helped community members to share their stories with the royal commission. Thank you to everyone in my electorate that is working hard on reducing the risk of gambling harm among vulnerable people. It might be providing in-language support and social connectedness through access to healthy activities such as singing, dancing, acting, sports, excursions, one-day trips and other activities that reconnect the member of the community or the member of the family that has been impacted by gambling.

I just would like to say that with this bill we can see that it is a comprehensive bill that makes several important and sensible changes to our casino, gambling and liquor laws. These are important areas of our community, and our community know the importance of maintaining a well-regulated environment with strong, effective oversight of that environment. We have seen the government’s commitment in this space with the royal commission and with the harm minimisation programs as well that I have ready touched on. We have heard so many stories about the impacts of gambling in the community, especially in multicultural communities such as Greater Dandenong and the surrounding suburbs. I look forward to supporting these programs wherever I can. I thank the Minister for Consumer Affairs, Gaming and Liquor Regulation for bringing this bill forward, and I commend the bill to the house.

Mr SOUTHWICK (Caulfield) (11:20): I rise to make some comments on the Gambling and Liquor Legislation Amendment Bill 2022. As we have already heard from a number of members in this house, this is not a controversial bill. It is pretty straightforward really, and it is not going to make a lot of changes. I think it has been a bit of a deliberate process. The government is going to be very conservative, as we know, on a number of these bills considering some of the situations, circumstances in the upper house. We have got a number of bullying allegations and a number of members in the upper house now who have crossed the floor and are not necessarily giving their support to the government’s agenda, so it will be interesting to watch the government’s legislative process and program going forward. We are probably going to see a pretty safe program of legislation in the coming weeks, leading up to November and the election, which is disappointing. This Parliament is here to try to ensure we make the best legislative changes possible and we ensure the safety of Victorians. When we are looking at things like gambling and liquor legislation, we have got to ensure that we provide those safeguards as part of all of that.

Some colleagues have mentioned today the importance of responsible gambling and some of the issues with problem gambling amongst vulnerable people. I had the good fortune of being a member of the inaugural Victorian Responsible Gambling Foundation board under the member for Malvern, formerly the Treasurer and Minister for Gaming, in our term of government back in 2010. That was a really important change, unlike the pretty uncontroversial legislation we are talking about today. That change brought together a foundation that looked at how we could make those that provide poker machines and gambling do it in a responsible way. There were a number of members that were on that board. Certainly it has both Labor and the Liberals involved in it—and I think an independent as well—so there are three members of Parliament on that foundation’s board. As I say, it is important because it ensures that safeguards are in place.

In my electorate of Caulfield we have a number of pokie outlets. If you look at the Caulfield Racecourse, that is an establishment that has a number of pokie venues, both in Caulfield and in other venues around Victoria. Certainly a lot of money goes into providing racing, and it has a foundation and other things that are associated with it. They are a very, very good operator, I must say; obviously they are attuned to the problems of gambling as well. But we do need to make sure that those safeguards are in place.

If you go down the road to Caulfield RSL, they are a club that has struggled, I must say, with their pokie licences. In fact I have made representations to the minister on a few occasions now about their licences. They have struggled in terms of just trying to make the pokies work for them, because obviously there is a cost with these licences. You can in many ways become a bit addicted to the revenue that comes from them, but then it does limit you in other things that you can do. The club has on previous occasions made representations on how they can be released from those licences, but up until this point, unfortunately, it is concerning to say that the government has not done anything about being able to support those community clubs.

I talk very strongly about community clubs in my electorate of Caulfield. Community organisations and their volunteers are the bread and butter of everything that we do. They are just so important. We see it each and every day. I know that in this bill we are talking about things like raffles and fundraising efforts that many community organisations might do. I know the Caulfield bowls club, the Armadale Bowls Club and a lot of the sports clubs run raffles, and we want to release them and reduce the red tape in their being able to run raffles. A number of schools run raffles as well to fundraise for playgrounds and the like.

There are a number of community organisations, a number of Jewish community organisations—we see it each and every day—and a number of other religious organisations doing fundraising initiatives all the time. We have a huge amount of community organisations in Caulfield—a lot that run programs for the homeless, a lot that run programs in terms of feeding people. I think we have probably got about half a dozen groups that do programs quite regularly, cooking and then distributing food. Souper Kitchen, which is across the road from my office, do a fantastic job of providing meals to particularly those from Russian-speaking backgrounds. Sarah and Avi do a fantastic job of that. In recent times I have been talking to Sarah and Avi about the Ukrainian situation. They have been doing some great work in terms of fundraising in support of those that are really suffering in Ukraine at the moment and also for those that are coming here in terms of settling them and providing food, clothing, jobs and education—all the things that must come for those that resettle from a very difficult situation like we see in Ukraine.

But to do all that work you need to find ways to fundraise. We have an organisation called Sharity that do a lot of fundraising online, and again there is talk about how that is all managed as well under the liquor and gambling legislation. It all fits into that in terms of running raffles and fundraising. It is all really, really important, and to have organisations that are actually set up to be able to do that is very, very important. There are a number of organisations that do that and do that very well.

As I say, this is not a very complex bill. It is pretty straightforward. I do say that it is very, very important that we look after those that are vulnerable when it comes to gambling. That is not to say that gambling does not fit into an important pastime in our community. I think back as a kid, having a couple of dollars in a family thing that we were doing, a sweep and that kind of thing—we have been brought up like that. It is a great Aussie thing. It is when it kind of goes beyond that. I remember meeting this guy, when I was part of the Victorian Responsible Gambling Foundation, at the casino. He was at one of the tables. He said to me that he had literally got his pay and come down and was putting his pay down on the tables. That is when it becomes an issue. It is getting the balance right, making sure that we are sensible about doing things, and for those people that are vulnerable, getting them the help that they need. So that is really what we have got to be focused on doing and supporting that wherever we can. It is about striking the right balance.

As I say, a big shout-out to all of our community organisations that fundraise each and every day to do the great work that they do. Having been a board member of Try Youth and Community Services and Big Brothers Big Sisters, they ran bingo centres. Those bingo centres were an important pastime and a way for people to come and meet friends. They would meet every single week at these bingo centres and enjoy playing bingo. The money from the bingo went to running childcare centres. So there is an example of effective gambling in a pastime that people enjoyed—that money from bingo actually helping families be able to afford child care. That is the kind of stuff where gambling can work sensibly and properly, and that is where we can be encouraging it. So I have no problems with that. I have always supported that. Where I do have an issue is where it kind of goes off the rails, so to speak.

Therefore we are not opposing this bill. I say let us do whatever we can to ensure there are safeguards in place but at the same time provide support to the many organisations that use fundraising as a way to do the very, very important work that they do.

Mr KENNEDY (Hawthorn) (11:29): I am very pleased to be speaking on the Gambling and Liquor Legislation Amendment Bill 2022. This bill makes a number of regulatory changes to ensure that both gambling and liquor are properly regulated in this state. I would just like to take up a few of the comments from the opposition. The Deputy Leader of the Opposition offered us the insight that we can expect all legislation between now and the end of the year to be safe legislation, and I am very grateful to him for his insight, because I do not like too much excitement in my life. So if it is an easy ride from now to November, I will save it all for December onwards of course. I thank him for that insight. However, there were other things where it was not just a matter of speculation. There are a couple of factual things that we need to mention. The opposition is clearly confused when it comes to Oz Lotto. Let us be clear: this is a national lottery. It is not Vic Lotto, after all. I think we need to say that. The opposition is also confused about clause 144 of the bill. This is about making sure that people who allow minors to gamble are appropriately prosecuted.

Having said that, before moving into the more detailed stuff here I would just like to make my own comments. I look at a lot of the sport and things that are sponsored by gambling organisations, and I must say I almost want to hit the television set when I get these advertisements of really seductive people, seductive situations—‘seductive’ is my word of the day—in all the advertising that goes on for gambling. So you see all this and it is put forward as something that is reasonable and natural—night follows day et cetera—and then there is this tiny little sentence at the bottom, ‘Gamble responsibly’. Well, the whole advertisement is aimed at doing it irresponsibly, actually. Am I missing something? It is all based on feelings. So they are saying, ‘Take all this in’, but just to maintain the ‘balance’ they say, ‘Gamble responsibly’. I must say that does not bring out the best in me. That is one of the reasons why I am delighted to be speaking on this, to tell you the truth. Yes, I will have the odd flutter, but I am so glad because in some ways I am a weak individual and if I get onto something, I find it very hard to give it up, like food and things like that. So I am very glad I have never really started on gambling in a big way, because I fear that if I was into it in a big way, I would find it very difficult. I am not as disciplined as many other people in the chamber here, you see.

Mr Wynne interjected.

Mr KENNEDY: Through you, Acting Speaker, I will not respond to that. Broadly this bill will amend the Casino Control Act 1991, the Gambling Regulation Act 2003 and the Liquor Control Reform Act 1998. I would like to focus on how this bill affects gambling-related harm, as I know, like in all of our constituencies, many in Hawthorn have been touched by the scourge of gambling addiction. You see that, don’t you, when you walk through those areas into other parts of a pub or club. It seems to me at times when I look at it to be utter loneliness and despair that has a person there, and all they are doing is just handing over all that money.

The bill contains a number of provisions relating to that harm, like the important change that a casino must wait 24 hours before transferring winnings of at least $2000 to a customer via electronic funds transfer. This delay is so important because it prevents individuals from immediately gambling away their winnings. As well as this it changes the arrangements for future wagering and betting licences. It also bans minor games like bingo and lucky envelopes online because these were already effectively prohibited in chapter 7 of the Gambling Regulation Act 2003. The sum total of these gambling-related provisions is a clear harm minimisation strategy. We are focused on reducing and eventually ending the scourge of problem gambling, and we are doing this through measures like those I have just mentioned—measures aimed at protecting our gamblers.

I would also like to speak for a moment about the dangers of problem gambling. We have all been to pubs with huge pokies sections or seen the betting ads on TV, as I have just referred to, and know how pervasive gambling is in our society. We have come into contact with individuals who struggle with gambling addiction. This issue affects so many in our state, and indeed we have only recently heard about the less-than-ethical behaviour of Crown Casino. Indeed Australians spend more per person on gambling than any other country in the world. In Victoria in 2019 we lost over $3 billion on the pokies alone. These billions often do not come from those who can afford it but just your normal law-abiding Victorian. That is why this bill signifies an approach that puts harm minimisation and prevention first, allowing communities and those with lived experience to benefit from these changes. This is so all Victorians can be protected from the dangers of gambling addiction.

Just to say a few words about gambling-related harm, the government leads the country in addressing gambling-related harm. We have provided the Victorian Responsible Gambling Foundation with $153 million over four years so they can reduce this harm. Other reforms have included introducing YourPlay, Australia’s first statewide precommitment system, which is available on every Victorian gaming machine, the prohibiting of ATMs in gaming venues as well as $200 transaction limits and $500 daily EFTPOS withdrawal limits. After all, Victoria is the only mainland jurisdiction without ATMs in gaming venues. We have also capped the total number of gaming machines until 2042 as well as setting municipal limits and regional caps on gaming machine entitlements. These measures have allowed Victoria to remain the Australian jurisdiction with the lowest gambling machine density, except for Western Australia, which does not permit gaming machines outside the casino.

This is a tangible harm minimisation strategy, as these policies represent the taking of concrete steps to reduce and eventually eliminate problem gambling. We have established a strong regulator, the Victorian Gambling and Casino Control Commission, with oversight from gaming machines to the casino. All of us will continue to strive for a better gaming environment, for less Victorians to fall victim to problem gambling and for the industry to do better. This legislation is part of this approach. As we tweak our laws, the harmful effects of gambling are minimised for all Victorians.

The other major set of changes contained in this bill relate to the regulation of liquor via orders placed on the internet, especially relating to creating a new licence category of online-only vendor packaged liquor licence, allowing certain licences to supply liquor online without an additional licence, applying standard conditions to online orders, and obligations and offences relating to online supply. These changes are a representation of our proactive legislative approach in this vital area, as it is important that we regulate the ever-changing world of e-commerce. In this case it is important that relevant, adequate regulatory standards capture online liquor orders. I know that the healthy student population in my electorate of Hawthorn are regular users of this service, and that is only going to grow going forward. As we are all aware, it has become more and more common to order basic goods, and the ordering of alcohol has become very common. It is also important to note that this practice has been used to circumvent our under-age drinking laws on a regular basis. It is the risk posed by liquor, especially to those under 18, that makes these laws so important, as many of our lives have been touched by alcoholism, whether it be in a friend or in a family member.

I would like to draw your attention not just to the online orders themselves but to those who often deliver them. These are of course our delivery drivers, who are often international students or foreign workers, like constituents of mine who study at Hawthorn’s Swinburne University. As we regulate liquor deliveries today, we must consider how we can better protect those who will be making many of these deliveries. Too many drivers and too many students have already died because of unsafe work conditions in this country. That is just another angle on it and one of the many reasons why I support this legislation.

Ms SETTLE (Buninyong) (11:39): I too rise to speak on the Gambling and Liquor Legislation Amendment Bill 2022. It is always a pleasure to follow my colleague and neighbour the member for Hawthorn. He always gives us a wonderful insight, but it is often very amusing, as again today was. I am sorry to be that person that now brings things down to a sadder level. I guess I really wanted to stand and speak on this bill because I am one of those people who have been deeply, deeply affected by gambling. I think most people are aware of that. Very sadly my husband—well, he is now my ex-husband—has a gambling addiction, so I have seen very close at hand what can happen to a family and to a life.

One of the reasons that I continue to tell my story is because the biggest issue we have around gambling remains the stigma, the stigma that people feel, so I think it is important to stand up and say this. We talk about this responsible gambling. For me that is almost victim blaming. It is not about the gambler. This is an addiction, and it is important that we acknowledge that. It is important that people like me stand up and talk about our experience, because it makes people feel more able to talk about it. I know that I spoke to Shane Lucas, who is the CEO at the Victorian Responsible Gambling Foundation, and he told me that there were studies that say that people will more readily admit to being a heroin addict than they will to being a gambler—and I find that extraordinary—because of the stigma associated with it.

I know in my own circumstances my husband at the time had a couple of different episodes, if you like, over the 10 or 15 years we were together. What would happen was that it would be going on in the background without me knowing, and it would just escalate and escalate until finally he would have to tell me. In one instance it was when $7000 had gone out of our bank accounts, and that escalated. So I guess what I am trying to say here is that it is important that people feel able to come and talk about this stuff. Maybe if he had come earlier, we would not have got to the really dire situation. And equally I really want that awareness for family, friends and carers of people that are addicted to gambling, because I look to my own circumstance and, very sadly, my mother actually came to me a couple of months earlier, before I became aware of this final incident. She came and she said, ‘We think something’s going on’, and I would not listen, would not hear. I have subsequently talked to therapists about it, and my therapist said to me, ‘Look, it’s because you don’t want to admit that your world’s about to come crashing down’. So I was kind of ignoring what I now know were some pretty obvious signs. So, again, I think it is really important for family and friends to feel that it is okay to talk about this.

This can happen to anyone. My ex-husband is no longer in the country, so I can talk about him—no, we are still friends, so I would not be rude. He has got a law degree from Oxford University. He is about as privileged as it comes, and it still happened to him, so I do not want this in any way ever to be viewed as a class issue. Although I must say it is striking to note that most of the gambling venues end up in low socio-economic areas, and they do that because people in those areas are under a lot of pressure. Gambling is a drug. People go there. I can remember talking to my ex about it and saying, ‘Look, weren’t you thinking about me and the boys when you were standing at the ATM machine?’, and he said, ‘No, I wasn’t’. He was out of it. He was literally out of it in the same way that one would be on any drug. He was just fixated on chasing a loss. In his instance I will not go into his emotional background and the reasons that he became an addict, but a lot of the time it is around social isolation and really also being under financial stress and so forth. So there are a lot of these venues that spring up in those areas.

I think we have got a lot to do. I really should be going into the substantive nature of the bill. There are some amendments here. I would always like to see more. I am delighted that the Minister for Consumer Affairs, Gaming and Liquor Regulation’s door is always open. I have banged on the minister’s door on many occasions. She is very receptive and is doing some great stuff in this space, and I know that there is more to come. I personally would really like to see the day when gambling just sits in the same space as alcohol and other drugs. I do not know, would it become GAOD? Do I put the ‘gambling’ at the front? What do you reckon, member for Oakleigh? GAOD will do. I would like to see it come together so that it is one thing. Interestingly enough I am about to go off to listen to a feasibility study around the Crossing, which is an addiction centre that is being looked at, and they are very keen to have gambling included in their work. I know that it is one of those things. Young men, sadly, get really whipped into it; you can see it on worksites and so forth. I find it devastating—turning sport, what is a pleasure for young men and young women, into a gambling source.

The Ballarat Courier ran an advertorial only two weeks ago on how to do online betting around AFL. I spoke to the editor there. He was very understanding. Of course it was an advertorial that had been purchased by the larger company that owned the paper, and I think he was pretty distressed himself about it. I have done quite a bit. The gambling foundation have a wonderful program called Love the Game, and I would encourage every member to talk to their local sporting clubs about it. I have been going and visiting lots of clubs. You just leave them with the paperwork. They can join up. Really all that they have to do is guarantee that they are not going to take money from gambling sources. But then the foundation will do some work with them around trying to get kids to understand that this is really a very, very harmful process.

There is a lot of wonderful stuff being done in this space. One of the programs I particularly like is the Libraries After Dark program. Again I would recommend any member to talk to their local library about signing up for it. It is something that was developed through the gambling foundation, but what is really interesting about it is it has actually become much broader than that because what it tries to target is that social isolation. The Sebastopol library stays open late into the evening, and they do lots of other community events there. You do not have to go there at all. It is not about identifying you as having a gambling addiction; it is just about saying, ‘Here’s an alternative’, because there are a lot of people out there who are on their own.

The other thing I am incredibly proud of in Ballarat is that we received some government funding to do a trial around allied health early intervention. As I was saying earlier, it is so incredibly important to get to people before their lives fall to pieces. Sadly for my husband and I, it was too late. The damage was so great by the time I found out that, although we tried, we could not come back from it. I would like to see people getting help earlier. So I am very pleased that this government funded, through the foundation, a trial to get allied health people to try and start those conversations. They are in a situation where they have the ability to try and open the conversation. It is a tough one because what quantity do you ask about? If I am losing 20 bucks a week, that is not big, but if I was on Newstart, 20 bucks would be a large amount. So finding the right questions, finding the right way to talk to people, is incredibly important. This trial sadly has been a bit slow because of COVID, but we are looking to start ramping that up. I am really, really proud of that. I realise I have not talked a great deal about the bill. It does have small—

Mr Dimopoulos interjected.

Ms SETTLE: Thank you. But this government has gone a long way in trying to address things. As horrifying as it is we are still doing a lot better than the others in terms of the number of pokies that we have. Our maximum betting limit is lower than New South Wales’s. We have statewide council caps. I know that there was talk from the member for Caulfield about the licence length, but at least we do have a limit, which New South Wales does not.

I am always going to be banging on the minister’s door; I always want more in this space. I particularly want us to address it in the mental health space. I would like to see the addiction centres recommended by the royal commission include gambling. I am not getting so far on that one, but I am going to keep fighting. Thank you to the minister for what are small changes and her ongoing work in this space.

Mr Wynne: Brilliant contribution. Hear, hear!

Mr MAAS (Narre Warren South) (11:50): Indeed, an outstanding contribution from the member for Buninyong. You know you are very well supported by many of us in the caucus, and we really respect and admire your very strong advocacy in this area. I do remember your inaugural speech, and I just remember how passionate you were in relation to this area, and I am very supportive of that.

Whilst we are at this point I might just actually throw a shout-out to the Alliance for Gambling Reform, who are an incredible organisation. It is fitting in many ways that they occupy the building at 552 Victoria Street in North Melbourne, a building I spent some 10 years in with the National Union of Workers. It is an incredible organisation, the gamblers alliance.

Mr Wynne: It is on the corner of Curzon and Victoria.

Mr MAAS: Yes, that is right. You know it well. The gamblers alliance are just incredible at bringing together different harm minimisation groups in this space. They are really terrific at tackling the drivers related to gambling that are big causes of inequality and hardship in our community. The statistics that they produce: there is something like $24 billion which is spent on gambling each year. Compare that to $14.9 billion on alcohol, $9.3 billion on illegal drugs and $6 billion on tobacco and you can see just on that scale nationally how big the spend is on gambling.

I am very proud of the track record of this government, because even though this bill is largely a technical bill, what it does is actually set up the regulatory framework, which other bills we hope to pass in the future will be able to build on. So we are setting that up by having this bill go through the Parliament. It is also a government that does listen and does consult all stakeholders. Many of the changes that are in this bill have come from feedback which has been gathered by industry over recent years. Indeed the industry has been very well briefed on the bill.

The government is overhauling how we regulate gambling in the state. This is one part of that, and there will be further bills before the house, as I understand the Minister for Consumer Affairs, Gaming and Liquor Regulation has said. Just incidentally, these changes have all been approved in New South Wales, Queensland, South Australia, the Northern Territory and the ACT as well. It really is only this government that is serious about protecting young people from the risks of gambling-related harm. We have provided the Victorian Responsible Gambling Foundation with some $153 million over four years to deliver on its mandate to reduce the prevalence and severity of gambling-related harm. This represents the country’s biggest commitment to address problem gambling.

I did say that I was proud of our record whilst acknowledging that there is much more that we can do. The government has introduced other reforms, including the country’s first statewide precommitment system, YourPlay, which is available on every gaming machine in the state. It has prohibited ATMs in gaming venues and imposed $200 transaction and $500 daily EFTPOS withdrawal limits. Victoria is the only Australian mainland jurisdiction without ATMs in gaming venues. There has also been the capping of the total number of gaming machines in the state until 2042 and the setting of regional caps and municipal limits on gaming machine entitlements.

The caps and limits help to ensure that Victoria remains the Australian jurisdiction with the lowest density of gaming machines, except for Western Australia, which does not permit gaming machines outside of the casino. I am really happy that the state has done this, because if you look at my community, which falls within the LGA of the City of Casey, statistics show that over the last year—and keep in mind too that as a result of COVID there was a lot of time that people could not go out and had to stay indoors—there was $387 000 spent on pokies per day, if you average that out. That is for the 207 operational days that there were—$387 000 per day, with $80 million spent on pokies per year in Casey—and that is just across the 13 venues where there are pokies. It works out to about $300 per person for residents of the City of Casey. It just keeps driving that socio-economic disadvantage. The City of Casey does have the second-highest pokies expenditure in Victoria, and it is something that we would like to see continually being driven down. I am really happy that we have those caps and limits in place. I understand that in the City of Casey there was actually only one application for a gambling venue to have pokies, and that was indeed knocked back. That was some three years ago now, and it is good to see that these applications are not proceeding.

So what is done instead of gambling? Well, I am really happy that the foundation has been consulting with many councils, including the City of Casey, to implement the Libraries After Dark program. That program is focused on reaching at-risk communities and those most vulnerable to social isolation. As the member for Buninyong has said, that is a known risk factor for gambling harm. I think it was the member for Clarinda who spoke about the prevention partnerships program in funding the Engaging Cambodian Buddhist Temples in Gambling Prevention Partnerships project. This is also happening in the City of Casey, and the aim of the project is to build the capacity of Cambodian community leaders, including monks, in Melbourne’s south-east to raise awareness of gambling harm within the Cambodian community and to engage community members with the issue.

In terms of the bill itself, we have established a stronger, more focused regulator through the Victorian Gambling and Casino Control Commission. The new regulator will have oversight of all gambling and gaming activities within Victoria, from gaming machines through to the casino. The bill will build on the work of the government by introducing further harm minimisation measures and improving the regulatory framework for gambling in Victoria. The bill does make those amendments to the Casino Control Act 1991 to enable the casino operator to pay gaming machine winnings by electronic funds transfer, and the provisions replicate provisions applying to clubs and hotels. As I have made mention of, these provisions and changes have indeed been approved in other states before, including New South Wales, Queensland, South Australia, the Northern Territory and the ACT. This is good legislation. It shows our government’s commitment to harm minimisation in gambling, and I commend it to the house.

Mr McGHIE (Melton) (12:00): I rise today to also contribute to the Gambling and Liquor Legislation Amendment Bill 2022. Firstly, I just want to commend the contribution by the member for Buninyong, her personal contribution. It was fantastic, and it puts a different perspective on gambling and the effects of gambling. We know that many people suffer through the addiction of gambling, so I thank her for her contribution.

I also just want to add that this bill is a technical bill, and the Andrews Labor government is very serious about tackling gambling-related harm and making sure our regulatory framework is fit for purpose. Of course the government has also consulted many industry stakeholders. A lot of the changes that are in this bill have come from feedback from those industry stakeholders, and that is why we are moving ahead with the introduction of this bill.

The bill seeks to make amendments to the Gambling Regulation Act 2003 (GRA), the Casino Control Act 1991 and the Liquor Control Reform Act 1998, and the amendments aim to increase competition, reduce red tape and improve the operation of some legislative provisions. Of course this bill makes an important change to the arrangements for setting the term of future wagering and betting licences.

We know that community organisations and charities who hold raffles provide so much, and fundraising is critical to those that facilitate this. And I know with my involvement in a lot of sporting clubs we relied on raffles every year to sort of raise money to keep the clubs going. So we are cutting the red tape for these organisations and increasing the threshold required to have a permit for a raffle, and I think that is a great change.

This bill will also cut red tape by extending the time line for payment of unclaimed prizes to the Treasurer. Currently these are not permitted under separate, largely federal legislation, but the GRA is still unclear on this at this stage. As a result, people may believe these to be allowed, and we find ourselves in a situation where new licence applications are being made that cannot be granted, and these changes will provide greater clarity. Amendments in the bill will remove the cross-ownership provisions restricting the monitoring licensee from also providing gaming machine technical services to venue operators. These changes aim to increase competition for future monitoring licences and bring Victoria into line with other Australian states.

The bill also will repeal obsolete provisions in the Gambling Regulation Act that relate to the former gaming operators, and the bill will also repeal the interactive gaming licence framework to avoid overlap with the commonwealth Interactive Gambling Act 2001. It also makes changes to the way clubs and hotels handle unpaid gaming machine jackpot winnings to make it easier for venue operators to return these funds to the players. And the bill addresses a regulatory gap in the Liquor Control Reform Act to ensure all supply of liquor remotely is captured by recent changes to the act.

The bill includes amendments to the Casino Control Act to permit the casino to pay winnings by EFT, consistent with the same requirements as hotels and club venue operators. This bill will reduce the risk of gambling-related harm by prohibiting online minor gambling activities, including bingo, fundraising events and lucky envelopes. The reforms are unrelated to the planned legislation which will establish new liquor and gambling regulator arrangements and the other reforms arising from the Royal Commission into the Casino Operator and Licence.

It will come as no surprise to many who know me that I enjoy a bit of a punt on most forms of gambling. I have certainly thrown the odd pineapple into a poker machine, and I have had many a bet on horseraces and the trots and the dogs. There is not much that I have not bet on. And I always have a flutter on lotto, of course. We always dream of the jackpot. I dream of it because I always see new caravans on the horizon. I would love to purchase another big caravan one day—maybe out of some lotto winnings, you never know.

I am passionate about the races. I do not believe I am addicted to it, but I am passionate about it. And certainly in my electorate, in Melton, we have fantastic harness racing facilities at Tabcorp Park. It was only last Saturday night I had to attend an event for the Melton City Council. It was the Melton Plate, which is a big trots race, and I was fortunate enough that I backed the winner. But, you know, the good thing about that facility, putting aside the harm of gambling, is that for most people it is an entertainment facility. On this particular night, in front of the grandstands, there were many families out enjoying carnival activities on the lawns. While there was gambling involved, there were a lot of other activities there for families. While we need to deal with the harms of gambling, these sorts of facilities provide entertainment and they provide some local jobs.

I have also attended that facility at Tabcorp Park, and I have spoken about this before. There is an event each year as a fundraiser for ovarian cancer and it is Team Teal. It is through the trotting industry that a high level of money is raised, through the trots races. If female drivers win those races, then there is much money raised to contribute to improving outcomes for women in regard to ovarian cancer and also to provide greater teaching, research and things like that. It is a really worthy event.

Tabcorp Park is an amazing asset for events and entertainment in Melton, and it creates a lot of jobs in the local area, in events, hospitality and accommodation. Again, I will say I am aware of the harm that gambling causes and can cause in our communities, especially in electorates like mine. In the outer-metropolitan electorates we see some of the greatest harm from gambling to those who are often the least able to afford to bet and of course who suffer the consequences. I refer back to the member for Buninyong’s contribution about how it can affect an individual and their family. There is obviously a lot more work to be done in that space in regard to gambling addiction and harm from gambling.

For many families and partners who are problem gamblers, the COVID restrictions over the last couple of years may have come as a bit of a reprieve as the pokie venues were closed. But it is important that as a government we have a strong regulatory system in place to prevent the harm that can stem from problem gambling. In my electorate of Melton I can think of only a few venues—we have got around about five gambling venues—that have poker machines, but the losses in Melton are some of the highest in the state unfortunately.

I did happen to write a letter to the Melton City Council a couple of years ago in regard to the Melton Country Club. They were seeking to have their licence extended. I think it is the Essendon Football Club that owns the Melton Country Club or has the licence for the Melton Country Club. They were seeking to extend their licence. I had no objection to the extension of the licence, but I felt the timing of the request was a bit unusual. But one of the issues that also came out of that was extending the operating hours of the country club. I think it was extending them from a 1.00 am finish to 3.00 am. I made the point to the Melton City Council that no good happens in a gambling den after midnight technically. I accepted the fact that they were open until 1.00 am, but then they wanted to extend it until 3.00 am. I have been in gambling dens at 3 o’clock in the morning, but it was mainly to get a drink more than to gamble. As people would know, me going to get a drink late at night is not unusual. If you have got gamblers at pokies after 1.00 am, say, they are not people that are there for entertainment. They are there because they are desperate. From my point of view, I was trying to make the point to the Melton City Council that we have got to protect these people and one way of protecting them is by reducing the hours in which they can spend all their money at a machine. I would have thought that spending your money at a machine up until 1 o’clock is plenty, rather than going until 3 o’clock. It did not work. The council did not take that on board, but anyway that is the way it goes. This is a good bill, and I commend this bill to the house.

Mr HAMER (Box Hill) (12:10): I rise too in support of the Gambling and Liquor Legislation Amendment Bill 2022, which makes a range of amendments to the Casino Control Act 1991, the Gambling Regulation Act 2003 and the Liquor Control Reform Act 1998. The bill does contain a range of reforms that will improve the regulation of gambling and liquor in the state of Victoria and more accurately reflect community expectations and technological changes.

Before I begin I do want to acknowledge the minister at the table, the Minister for Consumer Affairs, Gaming and Liquor Regulation, for bringing this important bill to the house today and also again, like the member for Melton, acknowledge the member for Buninyong in relaying her personal experience. I also acknowledge you, Deputy Speaker, particularly in terms of your long-term role and commitment with the Victorian Responsible Gambling Foundation and the very important work that they do.

The Gambling Regulation Act changes are important changes. Some of them may be seen as technical changes, but I think they will have a really important impact on individuals’ lives, particularly those who might get into some gambling harm, and also on the clubs and community side in supporting some of the work that local community clubs and charities do. So broadly, just to summarise, some of the key changes that will be made to the Gambling Regulation Act are seeking to amend the requirements for the term of a wagering and betting licence, remove the restriction that prevents an associate subsidiary or related body corporate of the monitoring licensee from providing gaming machine technical services to venue operators, make changes to the treatment of unpaid jackpot funds held by venue operators, increase the monetary threshold to obtain a permit for raffles, repeal the interactive gaming licence provisions in chapter 7 to avoid the uncertainty and inconsistency with the commonwealth regulation, and prohibit certain fundraising events from being conducted online.

I want to focus on a couple of the specific clauses that will be amended through this bill, and the first one relates to clause 133, which is to allow the extension of time to claim winnings from six months to 12 months. Now, probably until a few weeks ago I would not have really seen that this may be such an issue, but I have actually had an individual come to a couple of my street stalls who presented me with this exact challenge. He had purchased a lottery ticket just prior to the lockdown last year, and because the retail store was not open he was not able to go and claim it and did not have the facilities to claim it online. Six months has passed, and he obviously did not have the opportunity to do that once the retail store was open. He is now trying to work out how he can have access to those winnings. It just illustrates that there are real-life examples where this change will make a difference.

Turning to clauses 136 to 138, which deal with the prohibition of a number of online gaming services, particularly in the community and charity space, I think this is a really important change. It is more, I guess, a clarification given the restrictions on interactive gaming and online gaming that come through the commonwealth legislation. Online gaming and online gambling can really be the avenue through which gambling can begin. Often you do not set out to become a problem gambler and to have that issue take over your life, but you can be easily sucked into that world.

By having the online presence, as I think it was described by one of the speakers earlier—it might have even been you, Deputy Speaker—you are in a dark room, a dark environment, in the comfort of your own space, and there might not be anyone who is sort of watching over you and checking on you and seeing if it is time to go and time to check out. Even though this online gaming prohibition relates primarily to certain elements, such as bingo and lotto run by a community for charitable purposes, it is the starting point. It is that introduction that people might get, particularly when we are looking at trying to improve the regulations for community groups and charities in terms of how they may offer some gambling services like raffles and the like. Keeping that away from the online system is really important.

Turning to clause 142, which deals with the raffle prize money threshold, that will increase from $5000 to $20 000, with the threshold to be indexed each year from 1 July 2023. This is going to have a really important effect for local community organisations right across Victoria, including in my own electorate of Box Hill. You just see the number of local sporting groups, of our schools, that run raffles on a regular occasion simply to patch things up, to buy new equipment that is needed around the club and help run the club, particularly in sporting organisations. These raffles make such a huge difference in actually being able to run their club operations. A lot of the semiprofessional clubs also do pay some of their players a small recompense for their services. All of that costs money, and raffles can form an important part of that.

Of the parties that contribute to those raffles, there are many local businesses that will donate raffle prizes, and obviously with inflation since 1997, I do not think that the $5000 threshold has increased since 1997. So with the cost of these prizes and the generosity of the local businesses who are putting up these prizes we will often see not only individually the prizes being valued at more than $5000 but certainly collectively in terms of what that overall raffle prize pool will accumulate to. When I look at what the permit costs at the moment, it is only a small fee of $26.20. It is not a significant windfall for the government in terms of these permit fees, but it is just an additional impost on the clubs from not only a financial point of view but also a process point of view in making sure that they get all their permit terms and conditions right and the timing right to actually get that permit in place before they can run the raffle. I understand that that is going to reduce the requirement for those permits by about 50 per cent, which is I think a great initiative. With that, I commend the bill to the house.

Mr CHEESEMAN (South Barwon) (12:20): It is with some pleasure this morning that I rise to speak on the Gambling and Liquor Legislation Amendment Bill 2022. I must say, in listening to a number of fantastic Labor contributions this morning it gave me pause for thought to reflect on gambling within my community and across the Greater Geelong area and certainly gave me pause for thought about my interest in this area for a long time.

I must say that about 10 years or so ago now, as a federal member of Parliament, I found my photo actually posted—literally—on about 2000 poker machines across the then federal seat of Corangamite when we were looking to put in place a number of profound reforms to tackle the challenges of poker machines in the Victorian and Australian contexts and particularly in terms of the harm that they do. In reflecting on that time, that particular personal journey and the advocacy that I took up at that point, and in reflecting on the policy direction of the Andrews Labor government, I must say I do very much recognise that many, many people do enjoy gambling as a pastime and do indeed gamble in a responsible way that provides a great deal of entertainment for them and in a way that is not harmful to them or their communities or indeed their households. Having said that, though, what I have found with gambling is that those that have an addiction, that have those particular challenges, can find it very, very difficult and very distressing to escape addiction, and that has profound consequences not only for them, it has profound consequences for their households and it has profound consequences for their communities.

Reflecting on the City of Greater Geelong, we do see from time to time reports of extremely high levels of gambling and extremely high levels of addiction, particularly in communities that I suspect in so many ways can least afford that. Certainly from my end what we need to make sure we do, and I think what we have been doing as the Andrews Labor government, is recognise that people do enjoy it but also recognise in the same breath that we need to put in place appropriate mechanisms to protect those that need that protection—that is an appropriate and responsible role of any government—and particularly to make sure that we do not see the continued concentration of gambling in communities that can least afford it.

I must say, again in reflecting on so many fantastic contributions in this place, as many of my colleagues have done today, I wish to acknowledge the contribution from the member for Buninyong in telling her personal story of the consequences of an addiction within her household, what that meant for her, what it meant for her former husband and indeed I have no doubt what it meant for her kids, and the profound challenges at that time. From my end, whilst gambling again is something that people do enjoy, we do need to make sure that we have an appropriate policy response, an appropriate legal framework to support those communities, those families, those households that can least afford it.

In terms of South Barwon, I must say we do not have that many poker machines in my community, and that is something that at a personal level I am very pleased with. But what we do have is a number of community organisations, such as one of the clubs locally that supports some of the football leagues. They indeed do put a lot of money into football clubs to help support them with the capital improvements that they might wish to make to their grounds, to help support the growth of junior football and participation, and I think that is a good thing and that is a healthy way by which we can have a well-regulated gambling industry locally that does very much help support our local industries.

I just want to very briefly mention that I am someone who only really has a punt on a very limited number of occasions through the course of the year. I might put a few pennies into a poker machine on one or two occasions through the course of the year, but it is generally not something that I look to do as a part of my normal weekly routine. And it is not something that the majority of my community look to do in the course of their normal weeks either.

What I am a bit concerned about, particularly in terms of commercialised sport, are the online betting houses, for want of a better term, that can be found online. Often some of them will be advertised on commercial TV. But some of them, to be frank, are not in our jurisdiction, and the capacity for us to limit their activities, particularly if they are done in an unsafe way, is problematic. I actually think the commonwealth needs to show a lot more leadership around this. I think they do need to work a lot closer with the states to make sure we do have stronger national regulation to make sure that we have consistency around these things.

A lot of parents, when I am just out in the community holding street stalls and the like, express to me a frustration, an anger and an annoyance that they are sick of their kids being exposed to gambling through sports. That is something that I have picked up on, I am reflecting on and no doubt in the years to come we will seek appropriate public policy around those things. I think there is more that we ought do. I certainly think that there is a lot more that the commonwealth ought do in that context as well. It is certainly not something that was raised with me four or five years ago. It is a bit of an emerging issue, and it is something that we do need to profoundly reflect upon.

The other thing that we need to be conscious of is that the pandemic was a bit of a step change in so many different ways in our lives. I suspect when it comes to online betting that the pandemic has seen more people take it up, but that does not necessarily mean it has been taken up in a particularly safe way, and that is something that I continue to reflect on. I do commend the minister at the table, the Minister for Consumer Affairs, Gaming and Liquor Regulation, for this legislation. I hope it has a speedy passage. I want to see this cleared up.

Mr HALSE (Ringwood) (12:30): It is a privilege to follow on from the member for South Barwon in this debate this afternoon. I commend the minister at the table, the Minister for Consumer Affairs, Gaming and Liquor Regulation, for bringing the bill to the house on this day. It is a good proposed bill, one that is responsive to some of the needs within our community and within the industry and reflects some of the changing nature of the way in which gambling and liquor legislation should operate in the state of Victoria.

There has been a wideranging debate over the last hour or so on this bill, and people have brought with them their experiences from their own districts and electorates about the nature of gambling, how they understand that to intersect with their constituents and issues of harmful gambling or problem gambling. The ever-changing nature of gambling, Deputy Speaker, as you well know and have spoken about, necessitates therefore that the Andrews Labor government keep pace with some of the changes within the sector and make sure that we are balancing out that pursuit, which is one of course of permitting gambling within our community but making sure that gambling has appropriate oversight regulation. I was listening to the member for Melton talk about his experience of writing to his local council to seek an explanation as to why it was that the pokie machines, the slot machines, needed to run until 3 in the morning. So people right across this debate have brought significant local references to their local communities.

In my community we have a number of venues that have pokie machines; we have a number of gambling facilities. Some of those that I enjoy frequenting to have a drink or a meal with my family also have associated pokie machines. So it is something that I think probably across all of our communities we are dealing with in some way or another. We see, as the member for South Barwon said, the externalities and consequences of problem gambling too frequently here in Victoria and right across Australia, particularly during the pandemic with the advent of new gambling devices and systems that are embedded within the ways that you can access and utilise gambling. It is something that we should always be particularly cognisant of.

I want to just get to some of the specific aspects of the bill before making a few comments about a number of people who are doing some fantastic work in this area. Let me just go to the Gambling Regulation Act 2003 and the amendments that have been put forward. Obviously they provide for the term of the wagering and betting licence to be specified in the licence; change the treatment of unpaid jackpots funds held by venue operators; prohibit bingo, fundraising events and lucky envelopes from being conducted online; and clarify the functions of the independent review panel overseeing the regulatory review and licensing processes for major commercial gambling licences. Also it will capture all sellers who supply liquor deliveries with no retail premises in a category, which will be renamed ‘the remote seller’s packaged liquor licence’. These reforms, as has been noted, will reduce red tape, improve the operation of some legislative provisions and set up the arrangements for setting the term of future wagering and betting licences when the current licence held by Tabcorp expires in 2024.

I want to go to the support for community organisations and charities that is embedded in this bill by cutting red tape around raffles. We need to draw a bit of a distinction between those local groups that might rely on the local raffle as a source of funding and revenue in their facility. We know that these groups often form the very core of our community in so many different ways and they rely heavily on raffles, so we are increasing the monetary threshold required to have a permit for raffles to ensure that this effective fundraising method is as accessible as possible.

A key focus of the bill, as has been spoken about, is the reduction of harmful gambling-related activities. This government of course has a track record of reforms to minimise numerous types of harm, including the YourPlay precommitment system, the prohibition of ATMs in gaming venues as well as transaction and daily withdrawal limits and our caps on the number of gaming machines in the state of Victoria until 2042. We are the only mainland jurisdiction in Australia without ATMs in gaming venues. Victoria has the lowest density of gaming machines other than Western Australia.

I would like to make just a few comments on the work of the Alliance for Gambling Reform, which met with a number of MPs, including the minister at the table, the Minister for Consumer Affairs, Gaming and Liquor Regulation, at the end of last year. They came in to really express their lived experience of harmful and problem gambling. I remember meeting with Ian in particular from the alliance who shared his story about the hold that gambling addiction had had on him at one point in his life. He spoke about the vulnerability, financial and otherwise, it brought him. It is these personal stories that we hear too often within our community of people who get caught in the throes of gambling and its tremendously addictive power, and we see the way it impacts all demographics. The construction of the pokie machine industry seeks to exploit often the most acute vulnerabilities of people at their lowest ebb, at times. We heard from Ian from the alliance—the minister and I—and listened to that story of hardship and addiction.

That is why these reforms are part of a broader project that this government is working towards, which the minister is leading, to make sure that we get that balance right, that we make sure that people have appropriate supports so that if they want to have a flutter, if they want to go down and have a punt, if they want to gamble, that they can do that—that is part of the cultural fabric of our state—but also that we have adequate provisions in place to make sure that we are mitigating the very worst consequences and externalities that lead people into hardship, that lead people into poverty, that lead people into financial distress or ruin, that seek to put tremendous pressure on relationships and families and that often can take food off the table, as the lyrics of the famous song say.

This is one piece of reform that is moving in the right direction. The minister is doing some fantastic work in this space, and her diligence in addressing this, taking it seriously and meeting with people across the sector to make sure we get the balance right is just another piece of reform that the Victorian Andrews Labor government should be proud of.

Mr DIMOPOULOS (Oakleigh) (12:40): It is a pleasure to follow the member for Ringwood, and he concluded on a point that I want to raise a bit later in terms of a broader approach to protecting people. As the member for Buninyong said, there is no class system around gaming addiction. However, it is peculiar or probably noteworthy that many of the venues seem to be in some of the poorest parts of Melbourne. Nonetheless it is about the pressures that the member for Ringwood was talking about that people face in their daily lives.

Just to kick off my contribution, obviously there are a range of elements in this bill, but the one I wanted to focus on was, effectively, helping to protect young people, who are not really adequately protected from the risks of gaming. There have been technological advances that have helped us to do things better. Whatever people may think of certain platforms, the fact that you can get your meal delivered to your door, the fact that you can shop online and the fact that you can book pretty much anything online are benefits to the way we live. Technological advances have helped us in that regard, but they have also made it easier to harm children—not just in terms of gaming but in other areas too. It is much easier now for young people to get caught up in the gaming regime, and the current regulations have not caught up. They do not capture the advances in online gaming, so we are responding accordingly. We are trying to create a system where a young person is as protected online as they are if they walk into a gaming venue in person. We are trying to provide that protective environment. That is one part of this bill.

Interestingly, gambling problems and mental illness—or a version of some sort of mental condition or issue—often occur together. Approximately three-quarters of people seeking treatment for gaming problems also have a mental illness, most commonly a mood disorder such as depression. But interestingly, and on a sad note, only about 22 per cent of people with gaming problems seek help for their gaming problems. It makes me think of the reference that the member for Buninyong made in her contribution to this debate about something to the effect that there is evidence that it is easier for people to come out as having a heroin addiction rather than come out as having a gambling addiction. It seems to be similar in the mental health space. As much as it is a stigma for someone to own up to living with a mental illness, it seems to be more difficult to come out as being addicted to gambling.

Of course gambling addiction, for all of the obvious reasons, adds to the complexity and compounds anxiety, depression and other comorbidities. We intend to break that cycle of anxiety, depression and addiction. It is why we are passing this essential piece of legislation. But back to the member for Ringwood’s point, it is more substantial than that. I see the Minister for Consumer Affairs, Gaming and Liquor Regulation in the chamber, who has done outstanding work. But she alone and her portfolio alone cannot fix this problem. You need to create a protective environment. That is why we are investing $3.8 billion over four years in mental health and wellbeing. That is more than all of the other states and the commonwealth put together in terms of new investment in mental health. We are glad to hear—in fact I would even say some of us are appropriately jolly—that the opposition has decided to finally accept all of the recommendations of the Royal Commission into Victoria’s Mental Health System, including the levy. That is something to be thankful for—both the Parliament and the Victorian community. It is noteworthy that while it took too long, in my view, it took them a lot less time than the decade or two it took them to accept climate change is real and that they would also set some targets.

So this bill is one part of the equation, but there is a broader part of the equation in keeping people safe in Victoria. That is about creating a society, an economy and a community that allows people to live their very best life. That sounds lofty, but we have put that into practice step by step over the last 7½ years in this government—step by step. Look at the three-year-old kinder investment, for example. It is not just a three-year-old kinder investment; it is an investment in the life chances of that three-year-old. We have got the evidence from overseas and other places that someone who does two years of kinder actually has a better chance statistically of holding down a better job, a higher paying job, and of being healthy, mentally and physically. Imagine that, just from two years of kinder. This is just as relevant to gaming as anything else, because if you help create a healthy community, they are less vulnerable, as the member for Ringwood said, to being preyed upon by market forces, we will call them, like gaming venues. The wonderful member for Hawthorn talked about the ads that are enticing. You know, if you help create a healthy, good community, you are less likely to be prone to that.

Free TAFE is another one of those fundamentals that we helped create to create a good society and prevent people from being dragged into these activities. Free TAFE: the opportunity to re-skill and do something, whether you are young person or mid-career. Family violence reforms: you know, that is often another comorbidity—family violence and gaming also seem to occur together.

And of course the economic performance of this government—if you think about it, we have broken every jobs target we have set from year one. From the day we were elected we have broken every jobs target that we have set, and we set bold ones. It is a pretty incredible statistic—and from a pretty incredible Treasurer, in fact the best Treasurer in Victoria’s history. That is not just my view. I am sure that is objectively assessed somewhere in some magazine or some article.

But if you look, for example, again at the cohort that the member for Buninyong talked about, loosely—those communities that may be more vulnerable and stressed—they are also more likely to be those communities that prior to this government did not have access to long service leave, whether they be in security or contract cleaning. Those same communities did not have access to sick leave because they were gig economy workers or casual workers. All those pressures in life absolutely do create the environment where you are more susceptible to harm, whether it be problem gaming or other items—substance abuse.

Speaking of substance abuse, we set up—yesterday we announced—Turning Point as the centre of excellence for substance abuse treatment and research. That is an extraordinary commitment by this government—not just to accept what is given and known now in terms of mental health and wellbeing and drug and alcohol abuse and other addictive behaviour but to actually say, ‘We will set up this institution to find new and innovative ways into the future’. A lot of innovation in mental health and wellbeing across alcohol and other drug and every other area will come from Victoria in the next 10, 20 years because of both the announcement yesterday, with Turning Point, and also the collaborative centre that we have talked about that we are setting up, partnering a clinical service with a research partner.

They are all the things that help Victorians live their best lives. That means they also help less people come into contact with the problematic elements of some activities which we enjoy and are lawful but which some people unfortunately, because of their context that they are in, get caught up in a way that is problematic, like gaming. So this bill is extraordinarily important in catching that and keeping people safe, but it is no more important than all the rest of the work this proud government has done through economic policy and social policy to actually create a better society. I commend the minister’s work, and I commend the bill to the house.

Mr FREGON (Mount Waverley) (12:50): I also rise to add my little bit on the Gambling and Liquor Legislation Amendment Bill 2022, and I thank the minister at the table, the Minister for Consumer Affairs, Gaming and Liquor Regulation, for her considered and considerable work in the areas of gaming and the regulation of such. This is an important bill that will amend the Casino Control Act 1991, the Gambling Regulation Act 2003 and the Liquor Control Reform Act 1998. I follow on from my colleagues the member for Oakleigh and the member for Ringwood, who I have been listening to, on some very important insights into gambling and the effects of gambling in our state and how the minimisation of the harm of gambling is something that we will continue to have to work towards and improve for as long as gambling exists. I think it has probably always existed and always will, so it will be an ongoing task.

If I think back to my introduction to or first awareness of gambling, I was probably a fairly young tacker, five or six. I remember being at my grandmother’s house in Hilltop Avenue in Ashburton. We would go on a Sunday afternoon for lunch, for the roast, and we would come in and—I have said this before—my grandfather would be sitting there and have the radio on, and he would be listening to the races and having his flutter. That was his pastime, that is what he enjoyed on a Sunday afternoon. Then we would sort of nag him to take us down to the park, and he would continue to bet while we just ran around in circles. There was no harm as such.

Mr T Bull: It could be me.

Mr FREGON: I did not hear the interjection from the shadow minister at the table, but I appreciate the smiles. I am sure it was kind.

Mr T Bull: It was.

Mr FREGON: It was? Thank you.

Mr T Bull: I said, ‘It could be me’.

Mr FREGON: It could be you. It could be any of us. That is very true.

The gambling as such all by itself is not definitely harmful because not everyone has an issue with it, but a lot of people do. Having an introduction, say, like mine, where you might have a bet on Melbourne Cup Day—you have a sweep or you choose a horse or your father or your grandfather or other family members might have a bit of a flutter and a few bucks on it—there is no harm in that. Where it starts to be a problem—and this is where I and many others get concerned—is when gambling starts to permeate on a daily basis all of our lives, and especially for young people. These days with, say, sports gambling you hear sometimes young people, even primary school kids, mentioning it. When you potentially ask them or hear a conversation talking about, ‘Is Hawthorn going to beat North Melbourne on the weekend?’—which we did, by the way—rather than hear, ‘Yeah, I reckon they’ll win by 20 points’, you might hear something like, ‘Oh, well, they’re three to one’. It is when gambling starts to become part of the vocabulary that I think we need to do more to prevent that.

I have raised in this house before, I think March last year, the issue of loot boxes in gaming. This is another way that I am concerned that there is more that as a country we can do. I appreciate that the minister at the table has got some programs, which I am happy to mention in a moment, that will help with awareness and education for young people. But I do encourage the federal government to do more in this space because it is an unregulated area of gambling-like behaviour. The danger is that we are teaching our young people who are playing games how to gamble.

Now, anyone familiar with recent computer games, whether they be free or paid, will know that in many of these games there is an ability for players of the games to choose a pack or a box or a crate or whatever they are called, depending on the game, and pay either in-game money or real money and spin the wheel, so to speak, and get a random prize. The gaming industry is coming towards self-regulation in some of these ways, which is a good thing. But I think even though it is a good thing that they will put in some mechanisms for managing spending, that also acknowledges that there is a problem. So, again, I encourage the federal government and the minister for communications to look into what more we can do to regulate what is turning into a very, very profitable industry. I have no problem with that, but if there is harm associated, we need to be aware of that and we need to do more.

The Be Ahead of the Game education program developed by the Victorian Responsible Gambling Foundation is playing an important role in helping our students understand the risks and recognise the potential harms associated with gambling. I commend the minister’s and the department’s work in championing these programs to equip our young people with knowledge that will hopefully help them better defend themselves against falling into addictive gambling behaviour. It is a program that I would like to see in all of the schools and sporting clubs in my area. We have been talking to a number of the schools. We are going to work through that. I know John Ballagh down at Brentwood Secondary College is interested and Mount Waverley Secondary College is interested in how we can get that knowledge across, so I thank them for that.

One of the statistics that I saw is that young men aged 18 to 24 bet more on sport than any age group. You do not just start gambling at 18. No-one just turns up and goes, ‘Oh, it’s my 18th birthday now. I’ll start gambling’. It is something that you are looking at. It is something that has permeated through society. You see the banners around the MCG, and as soon as the goal is kicked, just before they flash off to the commercial break, up comes the Bet365, or whatever it is, just to remind you that it is there so that on the commercial break you can go and check your phone to see if you can win some money or lose some money. If you do get a payout, you can buy back in. Programmers know what they are doing. When you walk into a poker machine place and you just throw in your hundred bucks and you go, ‘Oh, it’s a bit of fun’, that is fine. When you are there over and over and over again and you play the numbers, you are not going to win. The game is set. There is a certain amount that gets paid back. Over time, over space, over a number of people, the bank always wins.

I commend the bill to the house. I commend the work the minister is doing in this space. I look forward to us talking more about the programs at the schools, which I think are a fantastic idea. I also beseech the federal government to do more work in this space. It is a bit of a gaping hole at the moment. In the meantime, we will keep educating, and I commend the bill to the house.

Sitting suspended 1.00 pm until 2.01 pm.

Business interrupted under standing orders.