Melbourne Cup Sweeps And Calcuttas

About this Item
Speakers - Cohen Ms Anne; Face Mr Jack
Business - Ministerial Statement

MELBOURNE CUP SWEEPS AND CALCUTTAS

Ministerial Statement

Mrs COHEN (Badgerys Creek - Chief Secretary, and Minister for Administrative Services) [3.11]: In 1990, this Government introduced amendments to the Lotteries and Art Unions Act to make lawful the conduct of sweeps and calcuttas on the Melbourne Cup and other events prescribed by regulation. Until that time calcuttas were illegal, although they had been conducted for many years by public-spirited organisations to raise funds for worthwhile community purposes. The amendment brought the legislation into line with community practice. In his second reading speech to this House, the then Chief Secretary stated that the intention of the legislation was to legalise relatively harmless gambling events that already were occurring. He indicated that before prescribing any further events, the Government would need to be satisfied that those events were already attracting sweeps and calcuttas.

This policy worked well for some time and allowed the Government to assess whether or not particular events had strong community support. However, after nearly three years' experience with the legislation, it has become clear that it is inappropriate to persist with a policy which states that only those calcuttas which were conducted illegally prior to 1990 may now be conducted legally. A number of organisations with worthy causes apply to conduct calcuttas but cannot do so, irrespective of the merit of their proposals, simply because they did not conduct the events illegally before 1990. To persist with that policy means there can be no fund raising through sweeps and calcuttas for any new and worthy community cause which may emerge.

After careful consideration of the matter, I have decided to change the policy. The new policy will remove the requirement that, to have an event prescribed, an applicant must have conducted sweeps and calcuttas on that event prior to 1990. All other conditions of the policy will remain. That is, there will need to be demonstrated wide community support and benefits to the community for the event and its associated sweep and calcutta. The event will still have to be a recognised sporting event in which there is an element of skill. The event is not to be contrived for the purpose of the conduct of the sweep or calcutta. The event, if used to raise funds for a specific body, must have that body's approval for the event. The view of the peak sporting bodies will continue to be obtained, if appropriate.

Although the change in policy does not require a change to the legislation, I make this statement because I am conscious of the fact that the 1990 amendments put before and passed by Parliament were made on the basis of the original policy. I am sure honourable members will agree that this new policy is a sensible one which will assist some of their local community groups in their continuing efforts to raise funds for worthy causes. I emphasise that this change in policy does not change the fundamental law which governs the conduct of sweeps and calcuttas and it is important that I restate the general provisions governing the conduct of sweeps and calcuttas.

Most sweeps and calcuttas in this State are conducted either for social purposes or for raising funds for worthwhile causes. As we approach the first Tuesday of November it is important to recognise the significance of social sweeps and calcuttas as part of the conduct of the Melbourne Cup. Many offices, factories and workplaces are involved in the conduct of social sweeps. They are harmless and entertaining. These sweeps may involve the sale and distribution of tickets denoting the horses involved in the event and are lawful if ticket sales do not exceed $2,000. In these events the total proceeds are distributed to the participants, depending on the outcome of the race.

Sweeps and calcuttas may also be conducted for fund raising purposes. In these sweeps and calcuttas the total amount paid in ticket sales may exceed $2,000. The important point to be made here is that no sweep or calcutta may be conducted lawfully for private profit or gain. A fund raising sweep or calcutta cannot be conducted within the law unless conducted by or under the authority of one of the
Page 4526
following entities. First, they may be conducted by charities who hold an authority under the provisions of the Charitable Fund Raising Act 1991. They may also be conducted by a political party, a trade union or any of the clubs around New South Wales which are registered under the Registered Clubs Act 1976. It is also lawful for fund raising sweeps and calcuttas to be conducted by racing clubs which operate under the rules of racing under the Australian Jockey Club or racing clubs under the Greyhound Racing Control Board Act and the Harness Racing Authority Act. Finally, these fund raising sweeps and calcuttas may also be conducted by any organisation not formed or conducted for private gain.

Any person involved in the conduct of sweeps and calcuttas outside these rules is committing an offence under the provisions of the Lotteries and Art Unions Act and shall be liable to a penalty not exceeding $1,000. The conduct of a fund raising sweep or calcutta with ticket sales in excess of $2,000 must be authorised by the issue of a permit by the Chief Secretary's Department. They may be conducted only on events which are prescribed by the regulations. There are also other requirements which must be met. Any person interested in the conduct of sweeps and calcuttas in accordance with this new policy may obtain further details from the charities division of the Chief Secretary's Department.

Mr FACE (Charlestown) [3.17]: The Opposition welcomes the Minister's statement today and I thank her and her officers for their consultation with me. The Minister knows that, for some time, I have had concern about calcuttas. I still hold the view espoused by the Minister when introducing the legislation, reported in the Hansard of 16th October, 1990, in which she stated:

As we become more knowledgeable about sweeps and calcuttas, we can upgrade the law. I would not go so far as to say that sweeps and calcuttas should be completely deregulated and that anyone, regardless of age, should be able to take part in them.

At that time I identified some concerns. The Minister indicated that we were charting new territory. What has occurred today is most timely. I feel, however, that there is a need to review the level of returns available to those who conduct sweeps and calcuttas. I understand that those who have been permitted to conduct sweeps and calcuttas have not been called upon to express an opinion in this respect. I do not suggest that many such people have erred deliberately, but misunderstandings might have caused them to go outside the original spirit of the law. These could be identified and rectified. Most of those who conduct such sweeps or calcuttas are probably the organisations that have been described today.

Wherever betting and wagering occurs, people will always try to go outside the law. The $2,000 ceiling is used by race clubs on prescribed events in various locations, most often in the country. However, I am concerned about those events which exceed the ceiling of $2,000, and ensuing private profit. The Minister knows, as does the Minister for Police and the Minister for Sport, Recreation and Racing, of my concern about picnic races and the attitude of those who conduct them, especially on the North Coast of New South Wales.

I put on the public record that, contrary to the belief by some that the Labor Party and politicians generally want to stop picnic race activities, I consider that they are in the interests of the community, provided they are run lawfully. I note that NRTV, in its continuing campaign against the Government and the Opposition, last night ran another segment about Bilambil races, in which it suggested that betting, two-up and a variety of other activities should be allowed to continue in complete defiance of the law. That is not the intention of the change in policy that has been referred to by the Minister. What the Minister said about some charities, registered clubs and racing clubs being operated for private gain is correct. It is essential to preserve the gains to which the Minister referred in her statement.

Complaints about picnic races have not stifled them but rather have highlighted anomalies. Racing clubs registered with the Australian Jockey Club, the Greyhound Racing Control Board and the Harness Racing Authority do everything according to the law, and yet others are doing things contrary to it. It is interesting to note that complaints have been made by at least six racing clubs on the North Coast, where picnic race meetings have proliferated. The meetings seem to feature the same jockeys and are organised by the same people. In many cases the people involved are of questionable character and are using the good charitable and sporting organisations in the region for their own ends. It is possible that in some instances calcuttas have been run on non-prescribed events and the proceeds used illegally.

I would like this matter to be clarified because the picnic racing clubs provide a lot of money to sporting organisations and charities. They do a good job, but should not operate outside the law. Many approved picnic race meetings are held and should be allowed to continue, provided they are not run for private gain and are operated by authorised sporting bodies and charities. However, the sanctions need to be reviewed. A fine of $1,000 for a repeat offender is not much of a sanction when one has regard to the money that may be gained from these activities. However, I welcome the broader definition that will enable more people to participate, to the disadvantage of those who have done the wrong thing.

As was mentioned by the present Minister for Agriculture and Fisheries and Minister for Mines, we were in uncharted areas. We were only authorising and making lawful what had been occurring for years. The reduction in the age limitation from 18 to 16 is sensible as contained in the original legislation. I thank the Chief Secretary and Minister for Administrative Services and her advisers for their assistance. The Opposition is pleased that the review has clarified this matter so that the change in policy will come into operation before Melbourne Cup Day.

Page 4527

Last modified 05/12/2007 16:34:23 : Update this page