Tinetti Jan; Watts Simon; O'Connor GregHon JAN TINETTI (Labour): Thank you Mr Chair. I too want to talk about the offshore gambling duty. And I want to talk about this in relationship to the regulatory framework because while I take the Minister's point around the fact that this went to the election this is a huge change for this country. It is a very big change in this gambling area and the take.What didn't go to the election was the regulatory framework and the two go hand in hand. The fact that this is where it becomes really problematic is that the Minister has talked about other OECD countries and their regulatory frameworks. Well Minister I've done research in this area and I'm quite passionate about it and I know that not all of those OECD countries and their frameworks are equal. In some of them where they have put a regulatory framework in offshore gambling has increased and it has caused many societal problems and an increase in that. Is that what the focus is here? Is it a complete increase in tax take that is going to take more societal problems overall or is there a focus on harm minimisation?I'm really struggling because we haven't taken this part to a public consultation to know what the intent is here and to know and to be able to decide whether we are looking at how we're going to support that harm minimisation in this country. I know that there was work that was done around the tax take in looking at building this regulatory framework back when you talked about the 2019 era and you talked about the consultation then. There was work that was done to look at most of that tax take going back into harm minimisation because the aim at the time was actually to reduce the amount of offshore gambling that was happening in this country.I'm really concerned because I don't think we know the absolute crux of this problem here in this country. I believe that if what you're talking about here Minister in this particular piece in the legislation is around solely the tax take without having it in hand with the regulatory framework then there is a massive concern to what the ongoing issues might be and the consequences of that to this country. So I'm really wondering when we're going to see that work what is happening with that work and how long that's going to be. You're talking about this happening after 1 July this year. Can you absolutely guarantee that we will have a regulatory framework in place that will have harm minimisation at the core of it—that won't have an unintended consequence of further harm in this country? This is where I have a real issue. We have got this here you've said you've taken it to the election but we haven't seen the consequences that go along with it.Hon SIMON WATTS (Minister of Revenue): Look I take and hear the member's concerns but I go back to the point that I noted previously is that the current state the status quo is that there is no regulation for these entities. There is a significant loophole. And the risks in which the member have outlined have no ability to be mitigated by the way in which the jurisdiction deals with that currently.So what this Government is doing is taking steps to address the exact points that the member is raising. And the member will be aware that this is a complex area and prior Governments have looked at this issue. The difference is that this Government is actually taking steps to take some action to actually do something about it. We're going to do that in a careful and phased manner in regards to the implanting of a gaming duty then implementation of a licensing regime. We have provided additional funding to the Inland Revenue Department (IRD) in regards to their ability to be able to administer this new gaming duty. That will include the Inland Revenue working with other countries and jurisdictions in regards to tax treaties around information sharing which will enable IRD to get a better understanding in terms of the broader players in scope that should be captured by this.What we do know from other OECD countries is they are already currently collecting gaming duties or whatever they refer to in their overseas jurisdictions from a number of these entities that aren't captured within the New Zealand net. So the information conversations between jurisdictions which are very well in place will allow us to formulate that and the additional funding from IRD will be able to ensure that we do follow up and enforce the gaming duty on those players. And we will continue to be relentlessly focused on ensuring that everyone pays their fair share and ensuring that that revenue flows back.And to the member's point around harm minimisation which I think many in this committee would agree is a critical element in regards to the negative aspects of gambling and the ability to deal with those consequences then we will have a better model overall.CHAIRPERSON (Greg O'Connor): Just before I take the next call now I'm aware that members on my right are seeking the call. I'm assuming that most of those calls are closure motions; however assumption can be a falsehood. So if anyone did want a call for the debate it may be useful if you just slipped a note to me and I'll make sure. Otherwise I'll assume that most of those calls on my right are actually closure motions.