Fenton Darien: Gambling Amendment Bill (No 2) — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeFenton Darien: Gambling Amendment Bill (No 2) — First Reading[Sitting date: 22 August 2007. Volume:641;Page:11403. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]DARIEN FENTON (Labour): It is a pleasure to speak in the first reading debate on the Gambling Amendment Bill (No 2).Hon Tau Henare: What do you know about gambling?DARIEN FENTON: Actually I know quite a lot and I tell the member that if he listens he will hear. Many people believe that gambling is a scourge on our society andI do not disagree with that. We could all wish that gambling did not exist in New Zealand at all but people have always gambled in one way or another and some to excess. There is no doubt that gambling brings with it a whole lot of problems and that is why the Labour-led Government introduced world-leading legislation in 2003 after the growth of casino and pokie-machine gambling during the 1990s. Can members guess who was in Government then? Only National!The purpose of the Gambling Act 2003 was to control the growth of gambling to prevent and minimise the harm caused by gambling—including problem gambling—to authorise some gambling and prohibit the rest to facilitate responsible gambling to ensure the integrity and fairness of games to limit the opportunities for crime and dishonesty associated with gambling to ensure that the money from gambling benefited the community and to facilitate community involvement in decisions about the provisions of gambling.The legislation we are debating tonight at its first reading is designed to build on that work by clarifying the law and removing any uncertainties. My wonderful colleague Sue Moroney that well-known horse racing expert from the Waikato gave me a really good tip about gambling. She said that I should never gamble more than I could afford to lose and I have taken that advice very seriously. Apart from having the odd punt on a horse I am not a gambler. But I do know a little about casinos and I have had quite a lot to do with them.When our largest casino opened in 1996 in Auckland there was much commotion from the National Government about growth in the local economy and local jobs. I went to the jobs expo held for interested workers in 1995 where 18000 people turned up hoping for a job in what they then saw as a glamorous industry. What they did not know was that Harrah’s which was building the casino intended to take full advantage of the then National Government’s anti-worker employment law that empowered employers to dictate pay and conditions in an environment with high unemployment and a climate of fear. So those poor workers who came to work at the casino turned up bright-eyed and keen but low pay long hours and the anti-union management culture soon led to a lot of disaffection and a high turnover among staff.Harrah’s and then Skycity flourished under National’s totally supportive gambling regulatory regime with a focus on profits for the tourism and entertainment industries. Regulation was light-handed. So were other things like health and safety workers’ rights and gambling restrictions. In my former job I spent a lot of time at Skycity Casino—for my sins—or at least outside it because the employer would not let unions into the place until Labour became the Government. But the workers did want to talk. They wanted to talk about some of the poor conditions the lousy pay—The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson): I am sorry to interrupt the honourable member but I say to members that the rules permitting interjections are predicated on the assumption that the person being interjected upon has the call. A number of interjections have been going across the House and neither of the parties involved has the call. Interjections are not permitted at all if they are directed at a member who does not have the call.DARIEN FENTON: The workers wanted to talk about the poor conditions the lousy pay the forced 12-hour shifts in some departments and the unjustified sackings. The bright shiny casino of those times had not only a growth in problem gambling but an exploited workforce.My first real dialogue with management came as the Employment Relations Bill was going through Parliament and the key person in charge of human resources at Skycity Casino then was an ex – Red Squad member from the 1981 Springbok Tour—funny that!Sue Moroney: It wasn’t Ross Meurant was it?DARIEN FENTON: No it was not Ross Meurant; it was someone like him though.Three things changed at Skycity Casino when Labour became the Government. Firstly we brought in fairer labour laws which meant that Skycity had to engage with union members in collective bargaining. The first collective agreement was signed in 2001 and that took quite a struggle. One of the great victories all those years ago was to achieve a $10 an hour minimum pay rate which just goes to show how hopeless the National Party was at getting wages up. Of course since then wages have continued to rise and conditions have improved enormously.The second thing that happened was that the Gambling Act 2003 came into being the purpose of which I have already mentioned. That changed casino and other gambling in New Zealand. Out went the focus on economic imperatives and the huge profits at the expense of the local population and in came harm minimisation and keeping the lid on gambling. We were delighted that the explosion in casino building came to an end with that Act.The third big change—and I pay tribute to Steve Chadwick for her contribution to this—came with Labour’s legislation to ban smoking in workplaces. Casino workers were right behind that legislation because they were sick and tired of working with second-hand smoke. It was yet more foresighted legislation by this Labour-led Government and it is today widely supported by the public.The legislation before the House today for its first reading is a tidy-up of the Gambling Act 2003. Inevitably with a large Act of Parliament like the one of 2003 changes need to be made to make this very tight regulation of New Zealand’s gambling industry as effective as it possibly can be. The Gambling Amendment Bill (No 2) contains technical amendments and some minor policy enhancements to clarify the law and make it work as it was intended to.The aim of the bill is to make grant recipients use pokie grants appropriately to extend the conflict of interest safeguards to all persons making decisions on gaming-machine grants to strengthen the requirements on venues banking gaming-machine profits to widen offences and regulations for gaming-machine operators and licensed promoters to introduce requirements for the accurate disclosure of non-cash prizes and to provide more flexibility for clubs wanting to merge gaming-machine operations.The recent reports about loan sharking and money-laundering in casinos are very alarming and these are issues that do need addressing. However this largely technical bill may not be the right vehicle to do so. I am confident that the work under way to deal with these issues will result in Government action. The loan sharking revelation of last week showed that the Department of Internal Affairs was already hot on the tail of that odious person.I also acknowledge the very real concern about pokie machines. As an MP working in South Auckland I share the worry of those communities about the impact they are having on family lives. Therefore I am particularly interested in the proposed amendments that will assist with the Act’s harm prevention and harm minimisation objectives. However I can only imagine how bad the situation would be today if Labour had not introduced its world-leading legislation to allow local authorities to restrict the growth of gambling in their communities.We need to continue to work together with the community to ensure that local authorities use the tools in the Act as effectively as possible. The Gambling Act specifically allows councils to consider their overall numbers and density as well as neighbouring land uses and the characteristics of neighbourhoods. Communities are becoming more actively involved in these processes as we recently saw with the 7000 submissions that were handed to the Manukau City Council calling for tighterrestrictions on pokie machines. A campaign is now under way to cap the number of pokie machines in Manukau. Other local authorities have already acted to put limits in place and some have sinking-lid policies.There is no doubt that the submissions on this bill will be very wide-ranging and that the passionate concerns communities have about problem gambling and the crime that is inevitably associated with it will be reflected in many submissions. This will inform the debate about the things we need to do in the future to ensure we continue to minimise the harm that gambling can cause and limit any growth in gambling. I look forward to participating as a member of the select committee in the process and I commend the bill to the House.