Lotu-Iiga Sam: Gambling (Gambling Harm Reduction) Amendment Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeLotu-Iiga Sam: Gambling (Gambling Harm Reduction) Amendment Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 07 August 2013. Volume:692;Page:12501. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Peseta SAM LOTU-IIGA (National—Maungakiekie):It is a pleasure to take a call on this the Committee stage of the Gambling (Gambling Harm Reduction) Amendment Bill. May I also join my parliamentary colleagues in acknowledging Te Ururoa Flavell for the work that he did on this bill certainly working with the Government to put in place measures for harm reduction. I just want to acknowledge the hard work that he did. We heard a number of submissions on this bill. Certainly the Government has taken up a number of the recommendations and certainly some of the submissions to reduce harm.As I said in my second reading speech this is a legally permitted activity. It might be an activity that some of us or many of us in this country disagree with. However this bill is about harm minimisation. It is about reducing harm and reducing access but it is also about education. Not one member across the aisle there talked about education and about allowing those people with problems to get access to resources that will allow them to do away with their addiction and do away with their problem gambling.To address the Supplementary Order Papers that have been tabled tonight—and I had a first view of them tonight although I was invited by Mr Mallard on Twitter to consider the Supplementary Order Papers. It would be nice to pick up the phone and call us if you want us to have a discussion about these bills but I did read these tonight on entering the Chamber. Supplementary Order Paper 292 talks about not having any transfers to higher-deprivation areas. The Commerce Committee changed this already and says that councils need to have regard to “the social impact of gambling in high-deprivation communities” when developing venue transfer policies. So this Supplementary Order Paper is superfluous. It is superfluous because it has already been taken into account in the deliberations of the select committee. It would also—and Mr Mallard should think about this—preclude class 4 venue licences from being transferred from less desirable suburban areas into central business districts and commercial areas. Some of them tend to have high-deprivation indices.I turn now to the Supplementary Order Papers—there are three of them actually—that deal with the distribution of proceeds within regional council areas and within local territorial authorities. Iain Lees-Galloway tabled Supplementary Order Paper 293 Ruth Dyson tabled Supplementary Order Paper 294 and Dr Rajen Prasad tabled Supplementary Order Paper 295. Again I say to members opposite that the bill as amended by the select committee already enables regulations to be developed to this effect. Mr Mallard knows this.Hon Trevor Mallard: Who trusts Chris Tremain?Peseta SAM LOTU-IIGA: I hear you Mr Mallard. I have been consistent in this House in saying that I would prefer that laws be passed in primary legislation but only to the extent that a better law or a better set of regulations can be promulgated in a consultation process which is what the bill develops and what it states. It already enables regulations to be developed to this effect. It is important that these are flexible and they are not set through legislation. Mr Mallard knows this.And I add that the Supplementary Order Papers say only in the same regional council or territorial authority district—the same as what? What happens when an organisation or a society has machines in different areas? How do you distribute those funds?Chris Hipkins: Pro rata.Peseta SAM LOTU-IIGA: Is it pro rata? Are they calculated—no no again there are no answers because again these Supplementary Order Papers have not been developed with any thought and consideration to the consequences. I say to members opposite: think about putting this through regulation think about having a consultation period with those in the industry and—Hon Trevor Mallard: I agree with the member. On those ones I agree with him and I am allowed to vote the other way.Peseta SAM LOTU-IIGA: Oh you do? So Mr Mallard agrees with me on that. I thank Mr Mallard for acknowledging that his colleagues were wrong—that one two threemuppets were wrong. Iain Lees-Galloway is sitting at the back—you are wrong. Where is Ruth Dyson? She is wrong. [Interruption ]The CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson): Order!Peseta SAM LOTU-IIGA: I just want to hear Mr Mallard rather than coming in this Chamber and embarrassing his three colleagues actually pick up the phone againand tell these guys to withdraw the Supplementary Order Papers because they are superfluous they are redundant they do not make sense and they were not thoughtfully considered.I now move to Mr Mallard’s Supplementary Order Paper 296 where he states that there must be a minimum rate of return of 40 percent in 2014-15 increasing by 1 percent each year. Again I say to the member and he is an experienced member but he obviously had not thought this Supplementary Order Paper through because again the Government is able to make these through regulation. We have already signalled publicly that these will be changed by regulation and most important—and Mr Mallard knows this—is that we have signalled our intention but this is better done through consultation with the industry. I think Mr Mallard would accept that—I think Mr Mallard would accept that.Having said all that I could go on about the Supplementary Order Papers that are tabled here. I have given you some clear examples. I have given this Committee and the public of New Zealand clear examples of why these Supplementary Order Papers have not been thought through. They are redundant and superfluous and I am sorry but the members need to think about these before they come to the Chamber again.