Garrett David: Gambling Amendment Bill (No 2) — Second Reading 
Garrett David: Gambling Amendment Bill (No 2) — Second Reading 
[Volume:654;Page:3118] 
DAVID GARRETT (ACT) 
: 
 One of the most pleasant things about coming to Parliament is being able to stand up and say that I agree with the speakers who have spoken before me who are nominally on the opposite side of the House. I think I am perhaps in the unique position tonight to be able to say that I was listening to Sue Bradford and Darien Fenton and I could identify with much in their speeches. I picked out just a couple of phrases. 
Chris Hipkins 
: That’s a worry! 
DAVID GARRETT 
: Mr Hipkins is probably a bit young to remember that wonderful quote about not wanting to be a member of the club who will accept that man but I suspect that that is behind what the member is saying. 
Darien Fenton said that there was much work to be done—we agree. We are supporting the Gambling Amendment Bill (No 2) at this stage but we agree that there is much to be done to make the bill better as it is far from perfect as it is. Sue Bradford the immediately preceding speaker might be afraid that I agree with her sentiments entirely about racing. I fail to see how this Parliament or this Government should devote any funds at all to racing—it is the epitome of waste and badly targeted expenditure. I have never been a great fan of gambling on races but like Ms Bradford’s and Ms Fenton’s parents my parents enjoyed a bit of a flutter. But why we are supporting it with Government money is totally beyond me. 
It is the hope of the ACT caucus that the bill will be further amended and refined when we come to the Committee stage. The Gambling Act is large and complex legislation. Here inevitably I depart somewhat from my colleagues on the opposite side of the House. Regulation is not the answer to all ills. Gambling is one of the most regulated activities in New Zealand—more so than hunting prostitution or even pleasure boating which is one of the leading causes of accidental death in New Zealand. For all the regulation of those leisure activities and for all that “nanny knows best” Government intervention we are told almost daily of the perils of gambling and of the havoc that it is wreaking in our society. I do not know when Mr Hipkins was last in a gambling studio in a public bar but I would hazard a guess— 
Chris Hipkins 
: Last week! 
DAVID GARRETT 
: Last week? I ask the member where it was. I ask him which pub it was. 
Chris Hipkins 
: Upper Hutt! 
DAVID GARRETT 
: Quickly now! I ask him what the name of the pub was. 
Chris Hipkins 
: Upper Hutt! 
DAVID GARRETT 
: Oh he has forgotten. 
Occasionally I am down in the Bay of Plenty and I find it very sad when I go into an old county pub in Paeroa. The old dining room is now full of nothing but gambling machines. If one calls in there for a quick beer at 5 o’clock or even at 2 o’clock there will be almost no one in the bar but the gambling area will be full. Sadly it will be full of people who one can tell are not really able to spend money in that way. There certainly is a problem. The extent of it I am told is that $5.5 million every day is lost in gambling in this country—$5.5 million. So $5.5 million a day is lost by New Zealand gamblers and that has to be bad thing when the people who lose that money are those who can least afford it. 
Sir Roger Douglas my co-MP likes to have a bit of a flutter I am told—but he can afford it. It does not do him any harm; he does not need regulation. Sadly other people cannot treat it as an enjoyment and an enhancement to life and those people are the problem. We are not talking about people who have a bit of a flutter like Ms Fenton’s parents and Ms Bradford’s parents. We are not talking about those people all over the country who have a sweepstake on the Melbourne Cup. 
Some say that funds from the pokies are lost to our communities. Like all things and all stories there are two sides to it. Between 80 and 90 percent of funds invested for want of a better word—it is not a good one; bookmakers are called turf accountants in England which has always amused me a little—or punted by punters are paid out as prizes and about 40 percent of what is left is paid out to community groups. For example just three out of dozens of pokie-machine operators in New Zealand—the Lion Foundation the New Zealand Community Trust and the Southern Trust—pump more than $100 million into the community each year. Members should think about that for a moment. They should think about the less than $20 million appropriated to Vote Community and Voluntary Sector. Five times as much money is provided to that same sector from gambling. There are two sides to every story. 
The Hohepa Homes Trust Board the Waimate Croquet Club and the Foveaux Harmony Chorus are not large organisations with deep pockets wealthy big-business donors behind them and a direct line to the decision makers in Wellington. They survive on the hard work of volunteers and are helped immensely by community grants from pokie-machine operators. Where would this funding come from if it were not for these grants? Would it come from the Government? That is unlikely especially in these straitened times. Would it come from a sudden rush in philanthropy? Well that would be nice but even less likely. Although philanthropy contributes more than Government ever can to the arts small sporting and cultural groups would continue to miss out. 
I have a few more: Literacy Taupo the Canterbury Land Search and Rescue Trust and the Waihi Beach Volunteer Coastguard. A very good friend of mine Mr Brian Harrison is a skipper of the Waihi Beach Volunteer Coastguard and he might be a bit surprised to hear that when we have a beer up at the Waihi Beach Memorial RSA—we never go near the gambling area and just talk the normal kind of male bonding stuff—some of the revenue from that gambling area which comes from the pokies goes to the Waihi Beach Volunteer Coastguard. I say good on Brian and his helpers. Where would we be without those organisations? When the anti-pokie lobbyists approach members over this and other gambling legislation I urge them in the words of the recently departed member Dr Michael Cullen to lighten up a bit and remember where we would be without them. 
ACT will be supporting this bill through to its second reading. However we expect to see substantial amendment and improvement before we can pledge to support it into law. Thank you.