Bradford Sue: Gambling Bill — Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee 
Bradford Sue: Gambling Bill — Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee 
[Volume:611;Page:8460] 
SUE BRADFORD (Green) 
: 
 For the first few years of this bill’s existence—and it has taken a remarkably long time to reach this stage—it was known as the Responsible Gambling Bill. It was only in the last phases of the select committee process that it was decided to change the title by removing the word “Responsible”—a truly prescient warning of what was to be this bill’s eventual fate. 
What was then called the Responsible Gambling Bill started its life at a time when the Alliance was part of the Government and when both the Green Party and the Alliance were pleased that Labour was willing in theory at least to take the bull by the horns and try to begin to deal with some of the most dubious aspects of the ever-burgeoning gambling industry in this country. We supported moves to place a moratorium on casinos; to tidy up the morass of regulations around various classes of gaming; to clarify the purposes to which the proceeds of gambling can be put; and theoretically at least to place some limits on the numbers of gaming machines out there in the community. We were also pleased that it looked like local bodies were to be given more control over what happened in their districts in relation to gaming venues. All of this suited the name “Responsible Gambling Bill”. 
However as time wore on it became apparent that the bill would not be as responsible as had first appeared and “Irresponsible Gaming Bill” as other members have indicated became a far more suitable name for the bill. First of all it became sadly clear that Labour had no intention of introducing greater responsibility into its new gambling regime when it refused to listen to Local Government New Zealand or to the Green Party about the need to change the bill so that it would allow local councils the authority to review gambling venues in their own districts established prior to October 2001. Nor was Labour willing to reconsider any alteration to the distribution regime for the proceeds of non-casino gaming machines despite widespread calls from church and community organisations and the local government sector for it to do so. On top of that about a week ago a 65-page Government Supplementary Order Paper suddenly appeared. This lengthy amendment—unseen of course by the Government Administration Committee—contains a whole raft of amendments that render this bill completely irresponsible. 
It is appalling that the Government has now seen fit to allow the Lotteries Commission to provide and promote interactive gaming including Internet gambling. That makes one of the most addictive forms of gaming even more accessible to everybody including children and young people in particular. 
The CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson) 
: This is a very narrow debate. 
SUE BRADFORD 
: Yes. I am talking about the responsibility or otherwise of what was called the Responsible Gambling Bill. In addition the Government with its United Future friends has decided in its wisdom to rescind an amendment agreed to earlier by the select committee and will now allow the practice of installing banknote acceptors into pokie machines to continue. It has also brought in amendments that enable the gambling industry to be involved in determining how much money should be set aside for treating gambling addiction and where it should go. As one commentator for the group Gambling Watch has said this is like setting a fox loose in the chicken run. 
In conclusion I have to agree that this title—minus the word “Responsible”—does adequately describe the bill. It is really sad that this is no longer a responsible gambling bill. I think this is a day that when Labour members look back will cause many of them to hang their heads in shame.