Senator LUNDY (7:34 PM) —I have some brief comments. I would like to acknowledge the points made by Senator Harradine, but I also want to remind you, Senator, of points made earlier. Very clearly this government have not, in either this legislation or in stating their intent with the legislation they are contemplating for banning interactive gambling in perpetuity, explored at any great length the issue of the control and regulation of online gambling content. This has not been done either within state legislation or through umbrella legislation at a federal level. That is an area of great neglect. I think the fact that there are significant consumer protections and consumer protection opportunities for gambling in an interactive or Internet environment means that the responsible approach is to actively secure a highly regulated environment for gambling content. The appropriate jurisdiction for regulating that content is the states.

On top of that, several of the states have already embarked on this endeavour, and I think their pursuit is genuine. There is no doubt that, whether this bill fails or indeed is successful, there is still a desperate need for leadership in producing and working towards a consistent, strong regulatory environment for gambling content on the Internet. I maintain that the appropriate and proven jurisdiction for success in that endeavour is indeed the states. Very clearly, however, this is not the direction that the coalition chooses to move in. Nowhere in this bill does it give expression to a great deal of the substance that was explored through that Senate inquiry and that is discussed both in the government's report and indeed in the minority reports of other participants, where the focus was on the consumer protections.

This bill creates a space for the government to move, sometime, in a different direction. That is one of the most disappointing features about it. I think it exposes the coalition for not being genuine about issues relating to social harm in gambling. In the essence of this bill, they are still not standing up in this place and talking about how they are going to create a better environment for those who do choose to gamble online. From all the evidence, we know that people will still be able to access those types of sites, regardless of bans and other legislative intentions. We are still not hearing that commitment from the coalition in any sense. Their activities to date demonstrate quite specifically that they have little regard for and are not prepared to tolerate an active involvement of the states in providing that regulatory environment. This feature of the legislation shows that it is not the wellbeing of the community that is at the forefront—it is for all the wrong reasons that I have probably spent far too much time already in this committee debate making the points on.