Brownlee GerryHon GERRY BROWNLEE (National—Ilam): The National Party is supporting this bill through the first reading but as has been already stated by Ian McKelvie we are doing so with a huge number of reservations. I listened to the Rt Hon Winston Peters explaining to the House that this was a $26 billion industry and it contributes very significantly to New Zealand's export earnings. I agree with him but it is in two parts that we should look at that particular contribution to our economy. The first is in the direct export of horses that are bred here for the racing industry and horses that are trained here that ultimately have the success that leads to the breeding industry itself having a basis to work on.But it's the product of racing that is in the greatest trouble and has been for a very long time. The problem with this bill is that it sets out to almost replicate a structure that's been a problem for the industry for some time. Now certainly it's true that they've been able to give out more money in stakes in the last couple of years but during those years their total revenue has also fallen. So they've been living off some kind of fat-of-the-land arrangement to keep the interest up for those who do depend on the industry for their livelihood.What I think is a little bit worrying about this is the statement in some of the material here. It says for the racing industry to thrive and survive in New Zealand it needs supplementary income. Now that might be that it takes a share of offshore betting. Let's make it very clear: clause 21 of this bill will not achieve the objectives stated in the explanatory note. Anyone looking at new section 65AU inserted by clause 21 will within seconds work out that a huge walkthrough is going to still exist for people who want to take the product of New Zealand racing offer it to their punters and make a dollar out of that part of the gambling—you'd say—continuum.The select committee is going to have to do an awful lot of work to come up with a regime that goes a little bit beyond empowering the new organisation to bring legal proceedings in a New Zealand court against an offshore gambling operator. That is just sophistry of the worst kind. It is total spin and will make absolutely no difference to the revenue stream coming into the New Zealand racing industry.The second part of that is the concern that it's going to be the racing industry that controls all gambling on all New Zealand sport. Now people will say Well that's what happens at the moment; it's done through the TAB." But the question that's never been answered—and I think it needs to be answered—is: who owns the TAB? How independent is that body and who is it that gives that body licence to have a monopoly over all gambling in New Zealand? The idea that it's owned by the racing clubs is a total nonsense. The idea that it's owned by the racing board as it's currently structured is I think untenable. So to continue with that arrangement pretending that there's nothing wrong and not worrying about what that structure is I think leaves those other sports seriously vulnerable because in the end it will be the Minister's appointees to this transitional body who will make the decision about how the funds that come in from racing or from rugby or from soccer or from any other sports that are gambled on are distributed.So while everyone is sort of saying very nicely "We trust that everything is going to go well." there will be a legislative structure here that takes away their voice takes away any right to expectation they might have and takes away any right they have to representation on that body and leaves it entirely in the hands of the board itself who all serve at the pleasure of the Minister. So let's not make any bones about it. This is in fact a very very clever bill designed to just simply pick up on all the problems that have been there for years—a bit of paste-over-the-top magic sprinkle dust all sorts of flash words about what we're going to do to fix it but absolutely no solutions to the biggest problem here which is: why is it no longer the great attraction to the public that it once was?Part of that reason I think is because it's dull. Sitting around in front of your television and watching racing might be entertaining for some people it may be fun for some people but for most people it's not. They do attend the big days out at Addington or at Riccarton or at Ellerslie or here in Wellington—I'm sorry; I can't remember the name of the course here—Hon Tim Macindoe: Trentham.Hon GERRY BROWNLEE: —Trentham—but those are few and far between. Those are few and far between and all this idea that "Well look come along to night racing; it's exciting."—it's dull as dishwater. I think every effort that they've made commendable as it is falls short because the industry itself have never been prepared to take into their number—to put on their boards to bring into their fold—people who have a bit of an entrepreneurial bent and a considerable love for the horse racing sport.I've outlined a number of our concerns. Firstly there is no guarantee in here that offshore betting will be able to come under a control from New Zealand that will see other offshore agencies contributing to the profit pool that the racing industry and those other sports rely on. Nothing in clause 21 can give anyone any confidence that that will be achieved.Hon Kris Faafoi: It was in your bill.Hon GERRY BROWNLEE: And then there is the interesting—well Mr Faafoi over there the most decent Minister in the current Government and no doubt the next appointee to the Cabinet—and boy do they need him in there because he is so good—has just pointed out that it was in the previous Government's bill. Well he might have noticed that the previous Government didn't move on it because that was one of the problems that we wanted to see fixed before we put it in front of the Parliament.Rt Hon Winston Peters: You didn't move on anything—you didn't move on anything.Hon GERRY BROWNLEE: Well this bill doesn't either Mr Peters. All this spin all the nice words all the gloss and all the "I care"s in the world make no difference at all to the industry.I would like to talk about the other aspect that is of concern to me and that is the transitional committee—the Racing Industry Transition Agency that's being set up. Well what happens if the next bill doesn't go through and how do we in this House know whether or not the next bill will remove the absolute authority of the Minister for Racing to make appointments to whatever new board might come after a transitional period? And while the transitional period is said to be for three years how do we know it's only for three years? There is no sunset clause on this bill no drop-dead date. It could just linger and not be dealt with and if it does it just endures and the Minister of the day has all the say on it.Just returning to my core theme why has this bill not addressed the issue of who owns the TAB? Throughout New Zealand community trusts are now under pressure and all sorts of Government agencies are under pressure to come up with extra funding for all the things that New Zealanders would like to see happening in their community whether that's sport or whether it's cultural or whether it's of a conservation nature or some other environmental nature. It would be nice to think that where people use the licence that society gives them to gamble some of the profits from that are made available on a greater basis than we can see in this bill for that community use.It's no surprise to me that the Rt Hon Winston Peters has not been able to tackle that problem because it is quite big. I accept that. But perhaps in another bill—Rt Hon Winston Peters: Ha ha! Oh dear!Hon GERRY BROWNLEE: Well there you go see? I'm looking across there; the Rt Hon Winston Peters is laughing. I think that's because he thinks it's simple. In that case why isn't it here? Why is there so much fear about taking on the totalisator board? It's unbelievable—unbelievable. And why would it be that we're expected to after the whole of the select committee process continue voting for a body that has a total monopoly on gambling in New Zealand and now through a very shonky clause 21 a very weak clause 21 a very timid clause 21 is apparently going to frighten all those offshore gambling agencies into voluntarily paying some contribution into this new body so that they can distribute it across those agencies?Finally the process that sees this going through in two or three weeks is completely unacceptable. There are too many things here that could go wrong far too many community groups out there who should be heard and that is something that we'll be discussing very shortly."