ACT Gambling and Racing Commission 

Act: Gambling and Racing Control Act 1999 (ACT).¹

Established: The Act establishes a body, not an office to be filled: s 5 says "The ACT Gambling and Racing Commission (the commission) is established." That is a third route again among the ACT bodies — the Auditor-General exists because s 6 of its Act says there must be one, while the custodial inspector has no establishing provision at all and exists only once an appointment is made. Note also what s 5 does not say: the Act does not make the commission a body corporate, so do not assume it sues and is sued in its own name without checking.

Purpose: The Commission licenses and regulates gambling activity in the ACT (including casino, gaming machine and racing bookmaker licensing) and controls the conduct of the ACT's racing codes. It combines two functions that are separate bodies in some other jurisdictions: harm-minimisation and consumer protection in gambling, and industry control of racing.

Where the authority sits

The functions in s 6(1) are to administer the gaming laws, to control, supervise and regulate gaming in the ACT, and to exercise any other function given to the commission under a territory law. Where it reviews legislation and policy to recommend to the Minister, it must engage in community consultation (s 8). It may delegate its functions to a public servant (s 10).

Powers conferred under the Act

The Commission can grant, condition, suspend or cancel gambling and racing licences, investigate licensee conduct, and set racing rules. Its decisions on licensing are typically subject to review, so a refused or cancelled licence is not necessarily the end of the matter for the applicant. Part 4 gives authorised officers investigation powers, including requiring information and removing things that might be used as evidence in a prosecution for an offence against a gaming law.

Is it a prosecuting authority?

Careful here — this is the one in this family where the answer is not a flat no. Part 4's investigation powers are framed around evidence "in a prosecution for an offence against a gaming law", so the Commission's officers gather what a prosecution would rest on. The Act does not itself confer a power to prosecute, and who conducts the prosecution is a question to check against the gaming law creating the offence rather than to assume from the Commission's regulatory role.

How it relates to the other ACT bodies

A licensing decision the Commission makes may itself be reviewable — for a merits challenge to a licensing decision, the relevant avenue in the ACT is the ACT Civil and Administrative Tribunal, not a complaint to the Commission itself.

Self-check

• Have I identified the Commission's dual gambling-regulation and racing-control functions?
• Have I recognised that its licensing decisions may be reviewable elsewhere, rather than treating the Commission's decision as final?