Thursday, 20 June 2024

Bills

Victorian Responsible Gambling Foundation Repeal and Advisory Councils Bill 2024

Committee

Resumed.

Clause 1 further considered (14:03)

Evan MULHOLLAND: I will just ask this generally – it is on clause 10, but I will ask it here with the goodwill of the chamber. These provisions provide that information and advice, as well as regulation of gambling, can be funded from the Gambling Harm Response Fund. Can I ask what this means? Does it mean that the cost of department oversight of gambling is now to be funded from the Community Support Fund?

Lizzie BLANDTHORN: No, it does not, and the provisions are consistent with what was previously in the VRGF act.

Evan MULHOLLAND: Clauses 14 and 19 to 21 abolish the gambling and liquor advisory councils. The second-reading speech makes it clear that they will not be replaced in law. How and who will the government consult for advice on these sectors?

Lizzie BLANDTHORN: Department of Justice and Community Safety (DJCS) is in the process of updating its stakeholder governance framework and will establish new non-legislative advisory bodies to inform government’s liquor and gaming policy development. Best practice and engagement have evolved since these councils were established. The new framework will ensure community stakeholders, people with lived or living experience – to go to Ms Copsey’s questions earlier – and industry stakeholders have an ongoing mechanism for engaging with government regarding gambling and liquor policy and other regulatory matters. Ministerial advisory councils are not required to obtain their expertise and insights from relevant stakeholders, and in the view of the government they are best achieved in these ways.

Georgie PURCELL: How will the government invite and receive community engagement with the abolishment of the Responsible Gambling Ministerial Advisory Council (RGMAC) and the abolishment of the Liquor Control Advisory Council (LCAC)?

Lizzie BLANDTHORN: The Responsible Gambling Ministerial Advisory Council and Liquor Control Advisory Council are in the process of being replaced, as we were just mentioning. They will have stronger representation from community advocates and people with lived experience, as we just talked about. Substantial work has already occurred in this space, like gambling policy. The Department of Justice and Community Safety has stood up a community advisory group that meets bimonthly, and this group includes academics and people with lived experience that were not previously involved in the RGMAC.

In relation to liquor policy, the DJCS has also stood up a lived and living experience group, which is facilitated by the Self Help Addiction Resource Centre, elevating voices that were not previously involved in the LCAC. The department also regularly engages with community stakeholders through forums chaired by the liquor regulator. The RGMAC and LCAC are not required to obtain that expertise, as we were just talking about in relation to Mr Mulholland’s questions. DJCS considers having consultation and governance mechanisms outside of legislation will enable greater flexibility and more targeted engagement, and DJCS will continue to consult directly with industry on matters that are relevant to them.

Clause agreed to; clauses 2 to 17 agreed to.

New clause (14:08)

Katherine COPSEY: I move:

1. Insert the following New Clause to follow Clause 17 –

‘17A New section 44A inserted

Before section 45 of the Victorian Gambling and Casino Control Commission Act 2011 insert –

“44A Review of repeal of Victorian Responsible Gambling Foundation Act 2011

(1) The Minister must cause a review of the repeal of the Victorian Responsible Gambling Foundation Act 2011 to be commenced within one year after the second anniversary of the repeal of that Act.

(2) The review must consider and report on –

(a) the efficiency, effectiveness, appropriateness and co-ordination of functions related to gambling harm across the Commission, the Department of Justice and Community Safety and the Department of Health; and

(b) the methods used to identify gambling-related matters to research, the independence of that research and the value of any gambling-related research that is conducted or commissioned by the Commission, the Department of Justice and Community Safety or the Department of Health; and

(c) whether the Auditor-General’s recommendations to prevent and protect the community from gambling harm have been fully implemented; and

(d) the availability, delivery and quality of gambling harm treatment services and gambling harm public education programs.

(3) The Minister must cause a copy of the report of the review to be laid before each House of the Parliament not later than 2 years after the second anniversary of the repeal of the Victorian Responsible Gambling Foundation Act 2011.”.’.

I will take a short moment to talk through this review. There are a number of specific aspects that this new clause directs the review to consider. I will just enumerate those now, and I again apologise for the lateness in circulating this to my chamber colleagues.

The review that this new clause requires touches on a number of the points that have been raised throughout the debate and throughout the committee stage. Specifically the review will need to consider the efficiency, effectiveness, appropriateness and coordination of functions related to gambling harm across the commission, the department of justice and the Department of Health, which has been a topic of some debate today. We have included that point in order to address some of those concerns and make sure that that specific aspect is considered when the review is undertaken.

In relation to research, the review will require consideration of the methods used to identify gambling-related matters for research and the independence of that research, which again is a point that has been covered. As I have acknowledged, that is a very important aspect of the work of the Victorian Responsible Gambling Foundation (VRGF) that we would like to see continue into the future. That is at new subsection (2)(b) in the amendment, which seeks to cover it off.

New subsection (2)(c) is around the Auditor-General’s recommendations on reducing harm from gambling. We understand that there have been raised in debate concerns that the Auditor-General made several recommendations around improvement for outcomes that the VRGF was seeking to achieve. The purpose of point 2(c) is, regardless of whether those functions are carried out by the VRGF or a successor agency, to ensure that those Auditor-General recommendations are fully acquitted and implemented satisfactorily. Point 2(d) goes to the issue of gambling harm treatment services and public education programs, which I think every member that has spoken to this debate has agreed is a really important function that needs to continue. Point 2(d) of this review clause would require analysis of the availability, delivery and quality of gambling harm treatment services and gambling harm public education programs. I note that this was an area of improvement that was pointed out in relation to the VRGF and in relation to those Auditor-General recommendations, and it will remain a very important part of our gambling harm reduction policy suite into the future in this state.

Those are the matters covered by the review clause. It is quite specific, but I have tried to tailor this review clause to cover some of the concerns that I anticipated and that have been raised in debate both in the Assembly and in this chamber. Regardless of where people stand on the bill overall, I think it is sensible to undertake this review once the implementation is complete, and I hope that all members will support this amendment.

Evan MULHOLLAND: The Liberals and Nationals will be supporting this amendment. We think it is important to review, although we do oppose the bill in general. If the bill does pass, we ought to see the actual outcomes of it, and I tend to think our concerns will probably be justified in some kind of review. It is also often the case that we are putting forward to the chamber similar reviews for other bills, so it would be a bit hypocritical for us to oppose this. I thank the member for putting it forward.

Lizzie BLANDTHORN: I thank Ms Copsey for her amendment, and the government will also be supporting the amendment. The intent of this reform is to improve the delivery of services to people experiencing gambling harm. These changes have been informed by extensive consultation with the entities responsible for delivering theses services, and they are supported by the Alliance for Gambling Reform. With the repeal of the Victorian Responsible Gambling Foundation, it is important that Parliament be updated on the effectiveness of this change, and that is why this government will be supporting the amendment.

New clause agreed to; clauses 18 to 21 agreed to.

Reported to house with amendment.

Lizzie BLANDTHORN (Western Metropolitan – Minister for Children, Minister for Disability) (14:13): I move:

That the report be adopted.

Motion agreed to.

Report adopted.

Third reading

Lizzie BLANDTHORN (Western Metropolitan – Minister for Children, Minister for Disability) (14:14): I move:

That the bill be now read a third time.

The DEPUTY PRESIDENT: The question is:

That the bill be now read a third time and do pass.

Council divided on question:

Ayes (22): Ryan Batchelor, John Berger, Lizzie Blandthorn, Katherine Copsey, Enver Erdogan, Jacinta Ermacora, David Ettershank, Michael Galea, Shaun Leane, David Limbrick, Sarah Mansfield, Tom McIntosh, Rachel Payne, Aiv Puglielli, Georgie Purcell, Samantha Ratnam, Harriet Shing, Ingrid Stitt, Jaclyn Symes, Lee Tarlamis, Sonja Terpstra, Sheena Watt

Noes (13): Melina Bath, Georgie Crozier, David Davis, Renee Heath, Ann-Marie Hermans, Wendy Lovell, Trung Luu, Bev McArthur, Joe McCracken, Nick McGowan, Evan Mulholland, Rikkie-Lee Tyrrell, Richard Welch

Question agreed to.

Read third time.

The PRESIDENT: Pursuant to standing order 14.28, the bill will be returned to the Assembly with a message informing them that the Council have agreed to the bill with amendment.