Mr DEAN ( Windermere ) - Madam President, I want to raise those issues that I raised during the briefing. I thank the Government for the briefing again, where some of those important issues that we needed to know about in moving forward were explained.

I must say that gambling is not an area that has always interested me. I asked a number of questions during the briefing where people probably thought I was putting it on, but my knowledge of poker machines is not very great at all so I was trying to find out a bit from the briefing as to how they operate and what they really do.

I do know enough, Madam President, to understand that they are programmed not to pay out very much at all. I think they are programmed to pay out a very small percentage of what goes through them - I do know that much and that is probably sufficient to deter me from using them. I think the odds are not that much in favour of the person using them.

We need to strengthen our gambling laws and legislation - I do not think there is any doubt about that. There are issues out there that have caused great concern, from time to time. I think we all know of families that have really done it tough, through one member or the other becoming involved in gambling and becoming addicted.

I can remember a fairly high-profile case in Launceston a few years ago that the Launcestonians would certainly be aware of - the member for Launceston and the member for Rosevears. Joc Littlejohn was a well-respected lady, a lady of high profile in that area and within the State to some degree, Madam President, who went off the rails and who became addicted and almost ruined the family. They survived and now Joc is doing very well and the family are. It is good just to see the turnaround there. She unfortunately was jailed as a result of some of the problems that arose with her gambling.

Madam President, we all know of families that are involved in gambling in a modest way, who can control their gambling desire, really enjoy it, it is an interest for them and they get a lot out of it. Therefore we need to balance it, we need to get it right moving forward. It is the old case of you always have a few people who will spoil things for others. But does that mean that we should stop it? No, it does not.

Because you have some alcoholics who drink to extreme, get involved in car crashes and cause devastation, does that mean to say that we should ban alcohol? No, it does not. It means that we have to have the laws right, we need to have the controls right.

The member for Pembroke raised an issue during the briefing. I have always been concerned that when you try to get some statistical data in relation to gambling and crime it is absent. People would recall, those people who were on my Estimates committee, that in about every committee since I have been in this House I have asked the Police department to supply those statistics. I recall the Commissioner of Police on one occasion saying, 'No, we do not keep those statistics but yes, we should'. And we can do it by some changes occurring within the system. Those changes, I have been told, have never yet occurred, but it was interesting today that during the briefing we were told that yes, some figures were supplied in relation to crime and gambling to the report that was done, that brings this matter to us today. I was surprised at that, and I will be pushing to find out what is going on and why that data was withheld from myself and others who were pushing and moving down this track during the Estimates.

I think it is a very important issue for the public to understand and to know what the connections are, whether or not there are any real issues out there and just how we should address them moving forward. I say that because statistical data would be relatively easy to collect in my view. It would be fairly simple when police are interviewing to find out what was the real cause of the crime that has been committed.

I recall at one stage, and I do not know what the statistics are now, but at one time drugs, for instance, were involved in something like 80 per cent, or even higher of the crime that was committed. Either the people were affected by drugs, they were stealing or committing crimes to buy drugs, or they were selling drugs. I would really like to know what the statistical data is in relation to gambling and crime to see if there are any real issues and concerns that we ought to be considering.

I raised the issue in the briefing of the payouts. I do want it recorded in Hansard that I understand that the Gaming Commissioner will be required and be able to produce codes of practice which will come out of this bill. We talked about the winnings and how, where winnings are in excess of $1 000, only $1 000 can be made by way of cash but the rest must be made by way of cheque. We were also told that the cheque could not be cashed in that same day. That is a concern and a problem for me because, as I said, a cheque could be provided at 11.45 p.m. and at 12.15 a.m. it could be cashed. That to me would be ludicrous and a nonsense and I could not accept that that could be the intention.

I think 24 hours is certainly the way to go. I think that could be controlled and I think that could be policed. I do not think that it would be difficult to include on a cheque the time of the provision of that cheque. I do not think that would be a difficult thing to do and comply with.

The other area that I have always been concerned with is the one of self exclusion and just how well that can be policed. I still raise issues and concerns there because with some of these people, because of their position and eagerness to gamble, they will move from area to another. If they know that there is a self exclusion or a person of interest has taken out an exclusion against them, they will travel around the State. In fact, they will travel interstate for the purposes of ensuring that they continue gambling. I do not know whether an exclusion order in this State, Madam President, applies interstate. Perhaps the honourable Treasurer might be able to answer that in his summing up of this debate. If not, it probably ought to be in place but I would suspect that that is probably the situation. To me, with the closeness of Tasmania to Victoria and so on, it would to be a bit of a nonsense to have an exclusion in place here that does not operate elsewhere and vice versa.

The 'fit and proper' test is a much higher standard we are told than that 'of good repute' and I think that that is a good position to take. We should have the highest standard possible in place and I support that position as well.

The area of decreasing the maximum bet is an interesting one and very clearly I support that. I think that $5 is certainly a better option than $10 although unfortunately a problem gambler will go to the maximum limit on every occasion. I have seen them. I have watched them doing it. Maximum on each occasion is what they will use and they will tell you that. They will tell you that they will use the maximum to get probably a better return or a return more frequently. So I have some support of that. As the member for Murchison said, I will consider the amendment at the appropriate time during the Committee stage.

Interestingly we have, of course, Federal Hotels in a strong position in a documentation they provided us and in comments made. They see an amount of $5 as reasonable in all of the circumstances and we can see that this is a 50 per cent cut so perhaps that is not a bad option in the first instance. These things you can always consider later on. Something in place now is not in place for ever and we continually look at these as we are moving forward.

I was told during the discussion that there are a number of other areas that they are looking at in relation to poker machine gambling and so on. I was quite amazed to learn that currently you can place as many as 50 lines on a poker machine. How the heck they can get 50 lines in one poker machine I do not know, but apparently it can happen.

Mr Finch - It is across handles as well.

Mr DEAN - Is that right? All over the place. How do you get 50 of them?

Mr Finch - Up and down. I will take you out gaming one night and I will show you how it works.

Mr DEAN - Okay, and you will provide me with the money to put through the machine.

Mrs Rattray-Wagner - So we have got one expert here.

Mr Aird - And he will take your winnings.

Mr DEAN - He can have my winnings. I understand that there is a move afoot to probably reduce that to 30. I am not quite sure what that will do, but there must a benefit in doing that. Perhaps that can be explained to me at another time as to what that would actually do.

Madam President, I am very pleased to see the bill come forward, the Government bringing in a bill which really does tighten up the gambling. Hopefully we will see benefits. Obviously this will be publicised and it will be marketed well. I will be interested in seeing, say in another 12 months after it is implemented, as to whether or not there are any changes or perceived changes in the number of people that are turning out to be problem gamblers.

The one issue that has always concerned me - and I referred to the matter of Jocelyn Littlejohn - interestingly when I was talking to her she was saying very clearly that during the height of her gambling addiction that she was going to her gambling places almost nightly and was losing a wad on most occasions. Now these venues, these people must have known what was happening. They must have had a good idea of what was happening with this person who was involved in the gambling, but nothing obviously happened as a result of that. I would have thought that there was a responsibility on these areas - and I think there is - that if that is happening and they can see a person gambling to such an extent that they would be obliged to do something about it, to at least talk to somebody. I do not know who that would be but maybe the honourable Treasurer might be able to address that, too, in his response to the second reading. As she said, had she been pulled up, had she been controlled or something been put in place she might never have reached the stage that she did. I think that is an area that should always be considered. I will be supporting the bill. As I said, anything to tighten up gambling to help those people who have problems is great, but we must always remember that there are far more people out there enjoying gambling, doing the right thing and getting a great deal of fun out of it. I do not begrudge them that and I support their desire to do that.