McAnulty Kieran; Watts SimonHon KIERAN McANULTY (Labour): Thank you very much Mr Chair. In fact the offshore gambling duty is my primary focus during this debate and there are many aspects of that that still need to be considered particularly when we consider that this is a new tax that has not had a select committee process. There is one area that I am particularly focused on at this moment and that is the proposed 12 percent charge. The Minister has said that this is to level the playing field". Presumably what he means by that is that onshore casinos pay a duty but offshore casinos do not and also it is not just casinos. So if we want to level the playing field we also need to take into consideration that there are class 4 operators across the country pretty much in every community in the country who offer pokie machines and what stands them out against others including casinos is that class 4 operators are required to redistribute a significant proportion of turnover back to the community. Now there wouldn't be an MP in this House who isn't representing or resident in a community that has community groups sports groups and other groups that are wholly reliant on this funding that comes from class 4 operators. The reason I raise that is because it has to be acknowledged that offshore operators have been taking turnover and revenue that would have otherwise gone through class 4 operators if it were not for the expansion of the online providers. Now the Minister has touched on some of the queries around harm minimisation but what this committee has not considered is the impact on community funding and what I hope to have the opportunity to engage with the Minister on over hopefully a few occasions is the consideration that's being given to the impact on community providers due to the loss of turnover from class 4 providers. If the Minister accepts that online casinos would have to some degree attracted some turnover that would have otherwise gone through class 4 operators the Minister must also therefore acknowledge that in making this change at the proposed 12 percent without accounting for the turnover that would have otherwise gone to class 4 operators there is actually a change in the intent that has been set by this Parliament as to what to do with the revenue that is extracted from that activity and if the Minister does accept that I think the committee deserves a response as to why the proposal is that there be a 12 percent duty imposed on this without any consideration as to the level of redistribution back to the community's organisations like there is through the Lottery Commission and other operators of this nature to then distribute back to community groups. I won't go on about that because I'd like the opportunity to explore this further. But initially I'd like the Minister to respond to those. Hon SIMON WATTS (Minister of Revenue): Thank you very much Madam Chair. The elements which we're discussing here in terms of Part 4 relate to the offshore gambling duty which we are going to be implementing. The broader points that are raised by the member are under the broader gambling system and I think what I can say is that the introduction of this gambling duty component to those offshore gambling operators will potentially look to increase the amount of gambling activity from offshore back through to those domestic providers whether they're gambling operators in pubs or clubs Lotto the TAB in New Zealand or other aspects such as that. So I think that with the increase in the amount of regulation and licensing in the offshore domain the proxy in terms of whether that will flow through to domestic aspects is probable but in terms of the exact elements around that it's a highly complex area in terms of that. But I think that the point that the member is noting in regards to what would be the implication is one which we have considered and would be reasonably aligned in terms of the way in which we expect some of those flows to occur. Obviously the proof will be in the pudding in terms of the flow-through around that once that licensing regime is in play but I don't see it as being a negative implication on domestic providers."