Clark David: New Zealand International Convention Centre Bill — Third ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeClark David: New Zealand International Convention Centre Bill — Third Reading[Sitting date: 12 November 2013. Volume:694;Page:14562. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Dr DAVID CLARK (Labour—Dunedin North): I can understand why that member Mark Mitchell wants to take only a short call on the New Zealand International Convention Centre Bill. The Government is on the back foot here. It is defending its decision to pay for a convention centre off the backs of problem gamblers. The excuses that come out are not fooling New Zealanders. New Zealanders do not want a convention centre funded off the back of problem gambling.John Key of course is up to his eyeballs in this deal. No doubt the members opposite have been instructed to keep this debate as short as they can because it is a pretty uncomfortable place for the Prime Minister to be. It was all kicked off over dinner with the Skycity executives. We know that he said that at this dinner they discussed a possible national convention centre and they “raised issues relating to the Gambling Act [2003]”.Hon Dr Nick Smith: Get out of the gutter!Dr DAVID CLARK: Mr Smith is claiming that by quoting the Prime Minister I am in the gutter. I find that deeply ironic because it is his Prime Minister across there who is in this dirty deal up to his eyeballs. He told officials to cancel their business case study and close off the Skycity options. His Ministers and officials repeatedly met with Skycity while holding off other tenderers. No one but Skycity was ever going to secure this deal. This was a deal done in a way that was not transparent. New Zealand businesses across the country are looking to this Government and asking “Why?”. New Zealand businesses are sick of a Government that does deals with its mates where the playing field is not level.The Deputy Auditor-General investigated this deal and even before the report was released the Prime Minister John Key was telling everyone he had been cleared and was “totally vindicated”.Hon Dr Nick Smith: He was.Dr DAVID CLARK: But it was not true.Hon Dr Nick Smith: Yes it was.Dr DAVID CLARK: The Deputy Auditor-General Phillippa Smith said at the Finance and Expenditure Committee that her report established deficiencies on the part of both Ministers and officials. If Mr Smith wants to claim that that is being “totally vindicated” that is very revealing about his view about what constitutes vindication. The Deputy Auditor-General says that this is a dirty deal and not “transparent or even-handed”—“flawed” was the word the Deputy Auditor-General used. She used “flawed” not “transparent or even-handed”. That is not total vindication on this side of the House. It may be on that side of the House. I think that reveals more about the values on that side of the House.This casino deal lines up with other deals we have heard about: the Warner Bros deal the MediaWorks deal and the Rio Tinto deal—handing over $30 million without even asking for a jobs guarantee.Hon Dr Nick Smith: Every one of them is about jobs.Dr DAVID CLARK: Oh that is not true Mr Smith. We know it is not true because Rio Tinto for example started restructuring the very next day—the very next day. There was no jobs guarantee. Bill English said that he did not even ask for any kind of jobs guarantee. Chorus is up next of course—we will see. This Government will go on doing deals for as long as it is here and as long as it can.I found Jonathan Young interesting in his contribution to this third reading debate. He referred to one or two submitters who were in support. They were certainly a minority around that table. Jonathan Young as the chair of the Commerce Committee along with the other National MPs blocked officials coming in to give further evidence on health consequences. He blocked Treasury from coming in. He blocked the Department of Internal Affairs from coming in. He blocked the Problem Gambling Foundation coming in. The members of Parliament who requested additional information were frustrated—frustrated—by the National members of Parliament who did not wish for further evidence on the problems and harms that will be caused by this bill because they simply did not want to know about them.The Tourism Industry Association was one of the few who presented in favour of this bill but it was pretty nervous and it trod a very careful line. I suspect that was in part because when the association was asked whether gambling harm was the best way of paying for this it was uncomfortable and did not want to answer that question and in part because across the industry there is a mix of consequences. We know from the New Zealand Institute of Economic Research and its independent report that just a net 18 jobs will be created across the economy. That is because there will be a few jobs created in Auckland but they will be sucked out of places like Taupō so Louise Upston across there will have to answer to her constituents as to why the convention business in Taupō is down. It is a direct result of this bill. It is a direct result of this bill that the National MPs are behind. Todd McClay will have to answer why business for conferences in Rotorua is down. David Bennett will have to answer why business for conferences in Hamilton is down. It is because this is a convention centre that will draw business from elsewhere in the country. That is why there is only a net 18 jobs created—because business is being sucked out of the regions by a Government that is neglecting these regions. That is not atypical. It is all about Auckland and Christchurch. Even they are struggling because of the Government’s reluctance to tackle the big issues but other places are struggling more and the Government does not seem to care.We know that a convention centre may not be a bad idea in and of itself but nobody thinks that paying for it by problem gambling is the answer. It is a bad deal for all New Zealanders. The Government originally tried to sell this as an economic development initiative. I think that the New Zealand Institute of Economic Research report has embarrassed the Government. There is no doubt about the just net 18 jobs across the economy. The reason the deal is so bad of course is because the Government put itself over a barrel. It did it itself. It shut down the process to competitive bidders. It got rid of transparency. It said: “We need to get the deal done because we’ve put our political futures on the line here.” That is where the Government found itself. Of course Skycity is not stupid. It is run by smart business people. They said: “We’ve got an opportunity here. The Government has put itself over a barrel. Let’s write our own blank cheque.” And so they proceeded to.The Government very hastily dropped all of the things that would have been good for New Zealanders in terms of covering off the risks of problem gambling. It decided notto write any of that stuff into law. It is there in the loosest of forms. None of the measures that the National members have been crowing about are actually written in the legislation. The Government got rid of the clauses in the original negotiating documents that would have allowed the New Zealand Government to claw back lost GDP if the centre was not run properly. It got rid of the clauses that said that the New Zealand taxpayer could have got back lost tax revenue if the centre was not run properly. The Skycity people were having a field day. They said: “Oh we don’t like this clause we don’t like that clause—strike them out. Put one in in fact. Put one in that says if gambling laws change we’ll see the upside no matter which way they change.” Two clauses were drafted to make sure that that would play either way. Skycity has got a fantastic deal out of that. There is no doubt about that of course.A professor of marketing at Bond University in Queensland—a friend of the Skycity chief executive Nigel Morrison—who has worked as a consultant on casinos on five continents says that the deal was a clear win for Skycity. He said: “He’s a friend but if you want to quote me you can: ‘Morrison did an excellent job negotiating with authorities.’ ” The 27-year licence extension is labelled as “icing on the cake”. So Skycity Casino gets 230 pokie machines and an extension on its licence until 2048 in return for building the International Convention Centre. But even if you put the horrors of problem gambling to one side comparison with any overseas valuation tells you that the taxpayers of New Zealand have been short-changed. Treasury was absolutely spot on—spot on—when it said that the public costs will flow to private gain once the centre is paid off.Of course there may be worse to come. The negotiations are not over. If the initial proposal exceeds $402 million there is a special clause in the agreement that allows the Government to hand over more cash to Skycity—more cash. And that is going to be negotiated when? In election year. So taxpayers should watch out. The Government has left itself open to close off this deal to put more money Skycity’s way. It is already one of the worst deals in Australasian history and this Government is trying to save its own political skin with it. But in the meantime ordinary New Zealanders are looking on and saying: “This is one deal too far. This is a Prime Minister who is riding roughshod over the law and over transparent process. We are sick of it.” They are getting sick of this Government. They are getting sick of the deals with the big end of town and ordinary New Zealanders are saying: “This is enough. This agreement should not go ahead. These people can and must be stopped.”That is why the National Government is falling out of favour with New Zealanders. That is why people are looking elsewhere for political leadership. That is why the people on the street are stopping me and saying: “We cannot wait for a Labour-led Government.” because ordinary New Zealanders are sick of a Government with its hands off the wheel that is doing dirty deals and is abandoning ordinary New Zealanders.