Sio William: Gambling (Gambling Harm Reduction) Amendment Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeSio William: Gambling (Gambling Harm Reduction) Amendment Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 07 August 2013. Volume:692;Page:12506. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Su’a WILLIAM SIO (Labour—Māngere):Talofa lava Mr Chairman and thank you for the opportunity. I will take a short call on this the Gambling (Gambling Harm Reduction) Amendment Bill. I want to say to Mr Te Ururoa Flavell that when he first drafted the bill and sent it around to members of the House for support I was one of perhaps many in this House who indicated that yes we would support it. I recall also that there was widespread support from community organisations on the ground at the grassroots level that were dealing with the problems and harm that gambling causes. In fact I was lobbied and no doubt many in this Committee were lobbied by organisations that supported the original bill that you had drafted.Sadly that mood has changed because after the work of the Commerce Committee it seems that there were many clauses in that original bill of yours that have been removed and so organisations like the Problem Gambling Foundation no longer feel that your original bill is intended to reduce harm as the title of the bill states. In fact the Salvation Army in my meetings more recently with it is also concerned about the continued harm that this bill now appears to actually promote. So like my colleague the Hon Maryan Street I too wonder whether the member whose name is on this bill has not considered withdrawing the bill altogether given that its original intent has been so watered down by this particular Government.I want to talk also with reference to a comment made by Peseta Sam Lotu-Iiga about the consultation with the industry. I absolutely agree with the last speaker from the Green Party Denise Roche that the feedback that I am now getting from those community organisations whose sole work is to reduce the harm that gambling causes in our community is that they are in fact being threatened by the industry—threatened by the industry—if they raise any opposition not only to this particular bill but also to the Government’s Skycity convention centre bill which increases the number of pokie machines.I want to refer to the Supplementary Order Papers that resonate with me. Supplementary Order Paper 290 on the transfer of licences in the name of Carol Beaumont has value I think in that it provides that “a territorial authority’s class 4 venue policy must include a relocation policy.” What I would hate to see is what we see in other countries of the world where it seems like those communities that are most deprived are the communities with a huge amount of gambling as well as alcohol being used etc. I think that that amendment gives some meat to territorial authorities to ensure that their policies do include words to the effect of how they would control the relocation of licences.Supplementary Order Paper 292 in the name of the Hon Trevor Mallard on the transfer of licences again resonates with our community in that it ensures that “no class 4 venue licence may be transferred to an area that has higher deprivation than the old venue.” I am somebody who lives in Māngere and has grown up and lived in Manukau City almost my entire life. We were perhaps one of the first communities to advocate quite strongly in petitions to the council and to central government that we did not seethe need for an increase in pokie machines in our communities. We were the ones who were the first to advocate quite strongly. Manukau City Council before it was rudely swallowed up by the super-city was one of the first to have a sinking-lid policy. That is a policy that has now been adopted by the entire Auckland region. Again if anybody in this Committee doubts the sincerity and the passionate desire of the Auckland region to say that pokie machines do cause harm and that we do not want any more pokie machines they simply need to look at the pattern of what the authorities and leaders of that community have advocated for—no more pokie machines. We held strongly—