Smith NickHon Dr NICK SMITH (National—Nelson): No industry internationally is as vulnerable to corruption as the gambling industry. In the Racing Amendment Bill we are talking about $2.7 billion a year of gambling. We are talking about hugely increasing the powers of the Minister in that we are giving him carte blanche to appoint the board. We are giving a repeal of the law that sets minimum amounts of gaming to go to sports and we're removing the law that sets out how that money is to be distributed between the codes.It is my view that a two-week select committee process on a 40-page bill deliberately sending it to a select committee—not the Primary Production Committee but the committee that is chaired by New Zealand First—and having a process of which there can be none of the scrutiny that is properly deserved is a total disgrace. I remind the House that at the last general election the electoral law was breached by New Zealand First and the racing industry. So scrutiny of this legislation is absolutely required.My first question which I'd love the Minister to answer is this: why are we extending the monopoly of the racing industry to take revenues from sports that have nothing to do with racing?Rt Hon Winston Peters: That's not happening.Hon Dr NICK SMITH: Well yes it is. The bill very specifically—why should the racing industry get revenues from others? Let's be very clear: the current law sets a minimum 5 percent of revenues that have to go to any other sport. That is being repealed.The second point I want to ask about is this question: why is it that if a New Zealander lodges a bet on the Lotto a bet on a gaming machine or a bet at a casino they pay the gaming levy? Why is the only form of betting in New Zealand—sports betting and horse betting—to be exempt? Are we really? Someone in the Government please give me a reason why betting on sports should be exempt of the gaming levy when every other form of gaming is not? I think actually every member of the House does know why the gaming levy is being exempted for the gaming industry and that is because of the contributions that are made to New Zealand First by members of that industry.Rt Hon Winston Peters: I raise a point of order Madam Speaker. That is totally disorderly. It is outrageous and if he wants to talk about corruption go look in the mirror but he won't get away with it here.Hon Dr NICK SMITH: Madam Assistant Speaker?ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Poto Williams): OK. It is actually a point of order and I will rule on that. I think Dr Smith you are sailing very close to the wind. I would ask you to pull back from that.Hon Dr NICK SMITH: Madam Assistant Speaker the parts of this bill that are really good have been sitting before the House for over two years and they are the parts—Rt Hon Winston Peters: I raise a point of order Madam Speaker. He made an allegation about a party being corrupt. He thinks he can slide past that with his background and for us not to have a protest. We want an apology right now.Hon Dr NICK SMITH: Speaking to the point of order it is a matter of public record that the New Zealand First Party and the racing industry were found by the Electoral Commission to have breached the law at the last general election.ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Poto Williams): I will allow the Rt Hon Winston Peters to speak to that. We are drawing this out a little.Rt Hon Winston Peters: Madam Assistant Speaker now he's compounded the matter by making a false statement and you'll know that because there was no such allegation that materialised into an action against New Zealand First. It's the kind of allegation he makes but without any base to it and now he's compounded his error twice. We are asking for an apology. We do take offence and he's outside of the Standing Orders.ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Poto Williams): As the right honourable gentleman knows it is whether the House has taken offence. I have to say that the Hon Dr Nick Smith has indeed compounded the disorder that was created with the initial statement that he made. I will ask him to stand withdraw and apologise—Hon Dr NICK SMITH: I withdraw and apologise. It is a matter of public record.ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Poto Williams): I will also ask the honourable gentleman to just be a little more circumspect in his—[Interruption] Just a moment please. I'm just finishing with my ruling—only a couple more words. I would ask the honourable gentleman whether he could just be a little more circumspect in the rest of his contribution for the next one minute and 51 seconds.Hon Dr NICK SMITH: I raise a point of order Madam Speaker.ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Poto Williams): I hope this is not on this matter which I have just ruled on.Hon Dr NICK SMITH: The right to speak freely in this House is one of the most important freedoms—ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Poto Williams): You do indeed but not to create disorder and by challenging the ruling of the Speaker you will be—[Interruption] No just a moment. I'm still ruling on the previous matter. So can we just come back to the matter at hand? I've actually called you to continue to speak. You've asked for a second point of order.Hon Dr NICK SMITH: I seek the leave of the House to table the decision of the New Zealand Electoral Commission with respect to the breach of the Electoral Act over advertisements at the last general election urging people to vote for New Zealand First and funded by the racing—ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Poto Williams): Thank you.Rt Hon Winston Peters: Can I speak to the point of order? I can help. Now I know what he's talking about. You see the offence—ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Poto Williams): Is this a point of order or is this a matter of explanation because I could clear it up by putting the leave to the House?Rt Hon Winston Peters: We are not going to support leave because what he is putting—ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Poto Williams): Thank you. I will put leave and the House can determine it. Leave is so sought. Is there objection?Hon Members: Yes.ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Poto Williams): OK. I call the Hon Dr Nick Smith.Hon Dr NICK SMITH: The parts of this bill that provide for the gaming industry developed by David Bennett to be able to generate revenue from the provision of racing events in New Zealand and offshore are entirely appropriate and strongly supported by the National Party with the disappointment that that bill has sat around with this Government for more than 18 months and has cost the racing industry over $16 million.The parts in this bill that are quite wrong are that currently in the law we set a minimum of 5 percent that is to go to sporting codes. That is being repealed. There is no justification for the racing industry unfairly grabbing profits from the monopoly that is being extended with this bill from betting on other activities and I challenge the good conscience of members opposite to answer the basic questions: why should the racing industry gain profits from sports which they have nothing to do with? Why should a person who bets on any other activity—the lotteries which provide huge money for our communities; they pay a gaming levy. Why should those who go to the casino or to a gaming machine pay a levy and the only people to be exempt are those on sports betting and gaming? This is a Government that has repealed over $1000 a head of tax reductions for workers and what they are proposing here is a tax reduction for gamblers. I simply say to members opposite: why would Parliament want to provide a tax cut for gamblers? Is that the highest priority—ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Poto Williams): Order! I apologise to the member. Your time has expired.