Councillor Chris Harris

The Greens are appalled at the City of Sydney support for the installation of ATM machines in establishments that rely on poker machines to boost their profits.

The Planning staff of the City of Sydney prepared a submission to the Senate Inquiry into Senator Xenaphon’s Bill “ATMs and Cash Facilities in Licensed Venues Bill 2008” and the “Poker Machine Harm minimization Bill 2008” proposed by Senator Fielding. The submission was not listed for discussion at a council meeting but was circulated internally during the transition period between the new and old council following the Local Government elections. The Clover Moore party signed off on the report.

Senator Fielding’s Bill seeks to place restrictions on the amount that players can feed into a poker machine at any one time, prohibits multiple line betting, limits bets per spin, regulates the spin rate and limits associated linked jackpot arrangements. These restrictions, which constitute a harm minimization approach, will reduce the “loss rate per hour” and are broadly in line with what has been the Greens public position for many years.  Congratulations Senator Fielding.

Sen Xenaphon’s Bill, which is keenly supported by the Greens, goes further in seeking to ban ATM machines from premises that operate poker machines.  The Greens support of this approach is based on solid empirical evidence that demonstrates that problem gamblers use ATMs in licensed venues at a rate that is 12 times higher than non-gamblers and 5 times higher than “recreational gamblers. 

But with breathtaking hypocrisy, the Clover Moore Party acquiesces to the business as usual approach of the City’s planning staff and opposes the ban on ATMs in pokie venues. This is despite acknowledging that vulnerable individuals need to be prevented from developing gambling problems and that the current prevalence of problem gamblers needs to be reduced.

The City’s submission gives two reasons in opposing a ban on ATMs in licensed premises that host poker machines. These reasons are that a ban would:

1 “limit the reasonable level of enjoyment from gambling by recreational gamblers”
2 “ensure that the livelihood of those associated with the gaming industry is not unnecessarily compromised”  

A recent study in the ACT by the ACT Gambling and Racing Commission found that only 5.2% of non gamblers accessed an ATM when visiting a licensed premises compared to 60% of problem gamblers.

So essentially what this means is that ATMs in licensed premises are provided by operators to feed the compulsive behaviour of problem gamblers rather than for the convenience of a very small minority of non-gambling patrons as is often claimed in justifying the need for ATMs. This study demolishes the two reasons that the Lord Mayor’s administration advance in support of their submission.

The other interesting point is that the City of Sydney does not have the power to regulate poker machines (GAMING MACHINES ACT 2001 - SECT 209) but it does have the power to refuse permission to install ATMs in a development application. So if the Clover Moore Party implements the position outlined in its submission, it renders the City impotent in the one area where it can make a contribution to limit problem gambling

The Greens will continue to campaign to eliminate government reliance on poker machine revenue, to ban the provision of ATMs in pokie dens and will continue to seek increased support for gambling addicts with harm minimization measures.

Below are Senator Xenaphon’s speech and the City of Sydney submission

xenaphons-speech-for-atms-and-cash-facilities-in-licensed-venues-bill-2008.doc

submission-to-the-inquiry-into-the-atm.doc

It was great to have Irene join me this year to lend a helping hand at the Luncheon Club’s 15th Birthday celebratory lunch on November 10. The Luncheon Club was set up 15 years ago by Carole Ann King to provide healthy meals and supportive community contact for people living with HIV. Carole Ann has now stepped back from day to day involvement in the luncheon club but this wonderful charitable organisation continues under the umbrella of joint bodies ACON and The Bobby Goldsmith Foundation. It’s always a real privilege to help at this function and to meet and speak with the guests.

Wednesday, November 5th, 2008

Friends,

Who among us is not at a loss for words? Tears pour out. Tears of joy. Tears of relief. A stunning, whopping landslide of hope in a time of deep despair.

In a nation that was founded on genocide and then built on the backs of slaves, it was an unexpected moment, shocking in its simplicity: Barack Obama, a good man, a black man, said he would bring change to Washington, and the majority of the country liked that idea. The racists were present throughout the campaign and in the voting booth. But they are no longer the majority, and we will see their flame of hate fizzle out in our lifetime.

There was another important “first” last night. Never before in our history has an avowed anti-war candidate been elected president during a time of war. I hope President-elect Obama remembers that as he considers expanding the war in Afghanistan. The faith we now have will be lost if he forgets the main issue on which he beat his fellow Dems in the primaries and then a great war hero in the general election: The people of America are tired of war. Sick and tired. And their voice was loud and clear yesterday.

It’s been an inexcusable 44 years since a Democrat running for president has received even just 51% of the vote. That’s because most Americans haven’t really liked the Democrats. They see them as rarely having the guts to get the job done or stand up for the working people they say they support. Well, here’s their chance. It has been handed to them, via the voting public, in the form of a man who is not a party hack, not a set-for-life Beltway bureaucrat. Will he now become one of them, or will he force them to be more like him? We pray for the latter.

But today we celebrate this triumph of decency over personal attack, of peace over war, of intelligence over a belief that Adam and Eve rode around on dinosaurs just 6,000 years ago. What will it be like to have a smart president? Science, banished for eight years, will return. Imagine supporting our country’s greatest minds as they seek to cure illness, discover new forms of energy, and work to save the planet. I know, pinch me.

We may, just possibly, also see a time of refreshing openness, enlightenment and creativity. The arts and the artists will not be seen as the enemy. Perhaps art will be explored in order to discover the greater truths. When FDR was ushered in with his landslide in 1932, what followed was Frank Capra and Preston Sturgis, Woody Guthrie and John Steinbeck, Dorothea Lange and Orson Welles. All week long I have been inundated with media asking me, “gee, Mike, what will you do now that Bush is gone?” Are they kidding? What will it be like to work and create in an environment that nurtures and supports film and the arts, science and invention, and the freedom to be whatever you want to be? Watch a thousand flowers bloom! We’ve entered a new era, and if I could sum up our collective first thought of this new era, it is this: Anything Is Possible.

An African American has been elected President of the United States! Anything is possible! We can wrestle our economy out of the hands of the reckless rich and return it to the people. Anything is possible! Every citizen can be guaranteed health care. Anything is possible! We can stop melting the polar ice caps. Anything is possible! Those who have committed war crimes will be brought to justice. Anything is possible.

We really don’t have much time. There is big work to do. But this is the week for all of us to revel in this great moment. Be humble about it. Do not treat the Republicans in your life the way they have treated you the past eight years. Show them the grace and goodness that Barack Obama exuded throughout the campaign. Though called every name in the book, he refused to lower himself to the gutter and sling the mud back. Can we follow his example? I know, it will be hard.

I want to thank everyone who gave of their time and resources to make this victory happen. It’s been a long road, and huge damage has been done to this great country, not to mention to many of you who have lost your jobs, gone bankrupt from medical bills, or suffered through a loved one being shipped off to Iraq. We will now work to repair this damage, and it won’t be easy.

But what a way to start! Barack Hussein Obama, the 44th President of the United States. Wow. Seriously, wow.

Yours,
Michael Moore
MichaelMoore.com
MMFlint@aol.com

I joined my colleague Cr. Irene Doutney at a rally organised by the Sydney Free Speech Alliance on Monday 10th November to speak out against the new City of Sydney law that targets ‘bill posters’. We then proceeded to defy the council regulation by putting up two posters, advertising The Walk Against Warming, on council smart poles. Other protestors then joined in putting up posters along George Street outside the Town Hall. The protest attracted much media attention.

We were disappointed with the Council’s new campaign that targets ‘bill posters” within the city’s boundaries. We believe the eight dedicated poles are completely inadequate, in terms of their size, shape and location, for the free dissemination of political and community information.

Irene and I agree that the new laws discriminate against small activist, political and community groups who wish to advertise rallies and meetings. Pole posters and leaflets are one of the only means small groups have of getting their message out to the public.

The City is using the Protection of the Environment Act 1997 to fine and prosecute those who post notices in the public domain. Although Council claims the law is aimed at big professional postering companies, small political and human rights groups have received notification that they will be fined if they put up posters within the city limits.

This is a gross attack on freedom of speech and penalises those groups who do not have the resources to take out paid advertising. It is unbelievable that there are only 8 small display poles for the whole city none of which are south of Surry Hills.

A warning letter sent to the state office of the Greens NSW claims that the action is being taken to prevent posters disintegrating and finding their way into the storm water system. The Greens are also concerned that posters might end up in storm water drains but strongly oppose a policy that criminalises the imparting of information in a vibrant and diverse community.

We asked staff to tell us exactly what types of posters will be targeted and what posters will be “overlooked”. We received vague and inadequate descriptions of what will and won’t be allowed.  This kind of arbitrary and highly discretionary approach is unfair and if allowed to stand unchallenged is tantamount to censorship of what can and can’t be promoted.

We think that the City of Sydney should meet with groups that they see as problematic and work out a protocol that will prevent posters ending up in storm water drains. The City should also look at its own practice of letterboxing hundreds of thousands of leaflets. These leaflets also end up all over the streets, in drains and no doubt in Sydney harbour.

Maybe the first fine should go to the Office of the Lord Mayor.
 

The Greens did very well at the recent Local Government elections. After the September 2008 ballot The Greens have 75 councillors in NSW (formerly 58 councillors).

In Leichhardt Council there were six Greens councillors elected out of a total of twelve. The Greens have been honoured with the Mayoralty (Cr. Jamie Parker) and Deputy Mayoralty (Cr. Michele McKenzie) on that council. Nearby Marrickville Council has five Greens out of a total of twelve and occupy the Deputy Mayor position (Cr. Fiona Byrne). In Byron Shire The Greens popularly elected Mayor, Cr. Jan Barham, was returned for a second term with an dramatically increased vote and an absolute majority (50%).

The Greens have increased their presence on many councils with more representation on councils including the City of Sydney, Cessnock, Orange, Woolahra, Hornsby, Palerang, Blue Mountains, Warringah, Leichhardt and Gosford.

Greens councillors have been elected for the first time in Lane Cove, Willoughby, North Sydney, Wagga Wagga, Lake Macquarie, Wyong, Hurstville, Yass, Burwood, Canterbury, Bellingen, Armidale and Coffs Harbour

So are the Greens on the rise or is it a flash in the pan? Are the Greens now the third force in Australian politics?

Ben Raue examines the trends and it appears that voters are becoming more confident to vote Green as Greens representatives across the country distinguish themselves as strong advocates and responsible decision makers,

The Green tide?
21 October, 2008 by Ben Raue

Support for the Greens has increased markedly since the beginning of 2008. Newspoll has shown an increase in the party vote over the 10% barrier for the first time, recently reaching 13%. State Newspolls have the party polling over 10% in all mainland states, with the Tasmanian Greens over 20%. Recent elections in the Northern Territory, Western Australia and the ACT have all seen marked increases in votes for the Greens, and the Greens came close to winning the federal by-election in Mayo.

At this time last year, nineteen Greens sat in Parliaments across Australia. This has now risen to 25, with the election of two extra MLCs in Western Australia, two extra MLAs in the ACT and one extra Senator, and the defection of Queensland Labor MP Ronan Lee. This is well in excess of the numbers elected by the Democrats or the Democratic Labor Party. This compares to 8 MPs belonging to conservative minor parties such as the DLP, CDP, Shooters’ Party and Family First.

Following the Greens winning three seats and the balance of power at last Saturday’s ACT election, Poll Bludger and Larvatus Prodeo have begun debates about the future of the Greens. The question stands: are the Greens on a path to become Australia’s third force in the long-term, or is the high vote simply an expression of a protest vote against the major parties?

The biggest change to take place before the swing to the Greens went into overdrive in January 2008 was the election of the Rudd government in November 2007. The Greens have suffered from progressive voters who sympathise with Greens policies voting Labor in order to defeat Liberal governments. Most voters do not fully understand the preference system, and this misunderstanding is encouraged by ALP politicians who tell voters that a vote for anyone other than the ALP risks a Liberal government. Labor governments tend to be markedly more conservative than Labor oppositions. This may also contribute to the Greens’ overall stronger performance in state elections, where they have been opposed to Labor governments.

So what sets apart the Greens from other minor parties in recent history, such as the Democrats and One Nation? The main difference lies in the development of the Greens. While the Democrats and One Nation rose to their peaks quickly (although the Democrats stayed at their relative peak for a long time), the Greens have slowly risen, gaining small swings at each election and gradually electing more members of Parliament. This has been accompanied by a reliance on a large grassroots membership, as well as much stronger presences on local councils and in state and territory parliaments. In contrast, the Democrats always had a relatively small membership base, with the party centralised on the Senate party room, with little in the way of local and state branch structures.

The Greens do not rely much on the Senate party room or its Senators. With over 10,000 members, an extensive network of local groups, local councillors and MPs in every parliament except the Northern Territory, the party is much less reliant on the performance of its federal representatives.

In particular, the New South Wales party relies much more strongly on the perfomance of its local councillors (now increased to 75 seats across the state) than on Greens Senators. The next generation of potential Greens MPs in NSW is largely composed of sitting or former councillors. This is particularly true of the seats of Balmain and Marrickville, where the Greens have tended to stand local councillors in an attempt to win the seats. The Greens also are growing on councils in Victoria and Tasmania. Two of Victoria’s three Greens MLCs are former councillors, with Greg Barber previously serving as Mayor of Yarra. With Victoria’s local councils slowly shifting towards a more favourable electoral system, the Greens should pick up more council seats in the November 28 election. In addition to giving Greens an opportunity to train up future MPs, councils give the Greens an opportunity to demonstrate competence in governing and to debunk

The Greens have also taken time to carve out a niche on the political spectrum to the left of the ALP, unlike the Democrats who struggled to attract progressive voters while maintaining a position at the centre of the spectrum and work constructively with all governments of whatever ideology.

While the Greens vote has increased, and current polls would give the Greens a strong chance of electing extra Senators in 2010, the Greens are looking towards winning lower house single-member electorates as the opportunity to cement their position as a third force. The Greens have had a number of close calls, polling strongly in the state seats of Marrickville (NSW), Balmain (NSW), Melbourne (Vic) and Fremantle (WA), with a number of other state seats also registering strong results for the Greens. The Greens came second in the federal seat of Melbourne in 2007 for the first time in a federal general election, although it is likely that a breakthrough will take place first in state politics. You would have to think that the Greens stand a very good chance of winning Balmain and/or Marrickville at the 2011 NSW election, and may finally get over the line in Melbourne in the 2010 Victorian election. If the Greens manage to win those seats they will have truly surpassed the performance of Australia’s historical minor parties.

So is the increase in the vote for the Greens a blip, or a long-term trend? It is true that the Greens have benefited from the poor performance of the major parties, but the major parties have been equally damaged by the rise of a credible party for people to cast a protest vote, even if the Greens are not yet seen as a credible alternative for government. There is no sign that those voters will turn back any time soon. Protest votes seem to be cast not so much against individual policy items or figures in the major parties but a culture of top-down control, arrogance and thuggery, something which is not likely to change anytime soon. Furthermore, once someone casts a vote for the Greens once, there is much less of a burden for them to vote for the Greens a second time.

The Greens’ performance in positions of balance of power, despite a media narrative which ignores history, has been relatively strong. While the Greens failed to hold onto long-term coalitions when they held the balance of power in Tasmania, the party managed to achieve parts of its agenda, and has survived the short-term decline that all minor parties suffer following a period supporting a government. Likewise, the Greens have generally acted responsibly in their time in the upper house balance of power in NSW, Victoria and Western Australia. Sure, they don’t just do what the major parties want, but that is exactly why their voters elected them. The first experience of Greens in the Senate balance of power suggests that the Australian Greens are performing well in their role of handling the power responsibly while mapping out their own policy agenda.

While there is no long-term future guaranteed for any minor party in Australia, the Greens appear to be on track for further gains and a significant role in Australian politics for many years to come. The Greens are no flash-in-the-pan.