RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS - Queensland Parliament ...

22 May 2013
Liquor and Gaming (Red Tape Reduction) and Other Legislation
Amendment Bill
1685
Mr BERRY (Ipswich—LNP) (4.25 pm): The Leader of the Opposition has raised matters on
which I wish to comment, so I rise to make my contribution to the Liquor and Gaming (Red Tape
Reduction) and Other Legislation Bill 2013.
The first matter that I wish to address, and which is hot in my mind, relates to the submissions
received and some of the conclusions drawn from those submissions and which were highlighted by
the Leader of the Opposition. I need to explain what my understanding is of cause and effect and
correlation. A reading of the submissions of the AMA and the Queensland Police Union shows a
mixing of the meanings of correlation and cause and effect. I am specifically referring to the taboo of
the serving of alcohol to hospital patients and the reasoning that this will cause them to become
alcoholic. I cannot quite see the cause-and-effect connection there. It is more of a correlation in the
sense that there are people in the community who do consume alcohol for many reasons and there
are people in hospital who are alcoholic, but that does not necessarily mean that there is a cause and
effect. The reality is that alcoholics are more likely to be admitted to hospital, but there is no cause
and effect in relation to those two premises. One needs to keep that in mind whilst reading the
submissions.
The AMA—and I thank the AMA for its submission—does something very similar. Its
submission commences with the statement that there is too much alcohol in our society and therefore
the laws should not be relaxed. I am having difficulty in understanding the cause-and-effect link. The
reality of life is that there may well be too much alcohol in society, and consuming too much alcohol is
not something I agree with, but I do not think that can be blandly said without going into the reasons
for it. I do not think it can be said that there is too much alcohol in our society so therefore anything
that takes red tape away and creates an imbalance will lead to more alcoholism. I am not prepared to
accept that is a reasonable link or a correlation.
As an example, I will take censorship. As our society has matured over the past 10, 15, 20 or
25 years, censorship laws have changed. They have not become tougher; if anything, as society has
matured, they have become less restrictive. I am sure that most people in this House would agree
with me in that regard.
That is not to say that we can do anything, because as our society matures that will evolve.
And that is what happens with laws. When government looks at changing laws it looks for a problem.
What is the problem here? The problem is in relation to the amount of red tape. I refer to the Chamber
of Commerce and Industry Queensland report released in July 2009 titled Blueprint for fighting
Queensland’s over-regulation. A couple of statements contained in the report have certainly
resounded within me and tend to summarise what has been happening. The report states—
The single greatest thing a business can do to enhance the wellbeing of our state’s community is to provide secure ongoing
employment.
That is one factor we need to take into account in respect of this balance. It goes on—
The difficulty with red tape is that each individual regulation can normally be justified by Government as being in the public
interest, however, when we sum all these individual regulations together it creates a staggering regime that essentially blunts
business from growing and employing.
The report points to the government agency of the Office of Liquor, Gaming and Racing, as it
was then called, as having the highest level of regulation in Queensland. At page 10 the startling
statement was made that only four per cent of businesses believed that the Bligh government
communicated new or changed regulation and business compliance requirements very well. Another
statistic in this report was that 38.9 per cent believed there was inadequate communication of new
developments and regulatory reviews. This backdrop illustrates why there needs to be a check—
stopping and taking account of how regulations have changed. In fact, the 2012 report of the
DestinationQ tourism forum also identified the same issue of red tape being a burden on business.
As I understand the statistics, in July 2009 the number of people employed within the
Queensland Public Service was at an all-time high. Even with an ability to investigate, there was no
evidence that alcohol was a problem in respect of the areas this bill deals with. Now that we know the
problem, the question is: how do we address it?
The government has identified that the problem really is the amount of red tape that has
accumulated over a period of time. Perhaps we need to look at other countries in which red tape has
been a similar problem—that is, you make one or two changes but when you sum up the lot you
realise that there is really more than one change and it has become such a burden that business has
now said, ‘Enough is enough. Let’s take stock of what the regulation is and make some adjustments
to it.’ That is not an unreasonable approach, because similar comments are being made in other