Mallard Trevor: New Zealand International Convention Centre Bill — Second ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeMallard Trevor: New Zealand International Convention Centre Bill — Second Reading[Sitting date: 05 November 2013. Volume:694;Page:14346. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Hon TREVOR MALLARD (Labour—Hutt South): I think that there are some things that need to be placed clearly on the record. The first is that Labour in Government will regulate to prevent gambling harm. Second we will not compensate for the regulatory functions of Government. If the convention centre is half-built no one is going to go around and rip up the foundations but this deal is gold-plated and we will not be bound by it. We will be supporting the Green Party’s amendments to the New Zealand International Convention Centre Bill. Gambling harm is an issue right across society and it affects many household budgets. I want to put a few things on the record from the select committee process.First of all the Labour Party members of the Commerce Committee asked that Treasury the Department of Internal Affairs and Ministry of Health officials advise the committee so that all members could be better informed. Government members led by Jonathan Young blocked that advice from going directly to the committee. What that meant was that we did not get the level and the quality of advice that a committee should receive. Instead—and I want to say that the officials whom I am now going to criticise worked for me at least the lead one did and he is a wonderful chap—at the committee the advice we were getting was from people who had themselves been involved in the negotiations. These people felt I think owned by the negotiations and had a sense of ownership over the deal. As a result of that the advice that the select committee got from the Ministry of Business Innovation and Employment was defensive and not informative. I regret that because if the Government had nothing to hide it would have allowed full free and frank advice from the full gambit of officials rather than channelling it through people who had a personal as well as a departmental commitment to this legislation.We are further concerned about the warning given to organisations providing health services—people on contract to the Ministry of Health who work with gambling addicts—that the people who did that very work were not allowed to come to the committee to give evidence. That was wrong and I would like to thank the Salvation Army for having the bravery to come to the committee and to make it clear on behalf of itself and the other organisations that those were the instructions it was under from this Government. It comes so close to being a breach of privilege—but it is probably not—but the thing that I do know is that it is morally wrong to stop the people who know the most about gambling harm from giving evidence giving their testimonies to the committee so that we could understand better.Notwithstanding that there was some advice that we received directly and indirectly that really summed up the situation. The Deputy Auditor-General said “we do not consider that the evaluation process was transparent or even-handed.” I am going to repeat that: “we do not consider that the evaluation process was transparent or even-handed.” This deal went to Skycity on a rort arranged at a dinner by the Prime Minister. He is transferring a massive amount of wealth to the private shareholders of Skycity from the people who are addicted to gaming machines in order to have something that he can turn the sod on next year in election year. I want to agree with Treasury. I sometimes agree with Treasury more than my colleagues would like but generally I do not. But on this one Treasury hit the nail on the head. It expressed “strong concerns that private benefits to Sky City will exceed public benefits to New Zealanders”. That is the rort that I am talking about.I say to Bill English: why does he not stand up for the things that he believes in? He knows that gambling is wrong at this level. He knows that this deal is a rort. He knows itin his heart and he knows it from the official advice that he has got. Why does he not take a principled stand? We all know there is a conscience vote on this issue. I am asking Bill English to look at the advice that he has received to understand it and to vote according to his conscience on this bill.There is a growing consensus that the Ministers undervalued the worth of the additional pokie machines and more important the value to Skycity of the 27-year unchallengeable—other than by legislation—extension to its exclusive licence in Auckland. These are the people who are providing an extension to the monopoly that sits around casino gambling in Auckland. The Australian examples indicate that that sort of arrangement on its own is worth hundreds of millions of dollars. In Australia Skycity is prepared to pay it but here it was hardly counted—hardly counted—in the Government’s evaluation of the worth of this deal. We also note that the report that was prised out of the Minister who preceded me in this debate the Minister for Economic Development indicated that because of the diversion of investment there will be only a net 18 jobs created.Metiria Turei: 1-8.Hon TREVOR MALLARD: One-eight. He said thousands. It might be that thousands of people are involved in the building of it but net 18 jobs is the advice that he asked for and that he got and tried to hide. That is just typical of the arrangements around this legislation: blow it up as wonderful in public and if there is any advice that does not support John Key’s view—the sacrifice of the gamblers to his sod-turning—then let us keep it hidden away. If any advice does not agree with John Key then let us keep it hidden away. We are going to see many more examples of this.There is no doubt notwithstanding what the Minister for Economic Development said that these tables are the most used and are the worst form of gambling. The machines are used much more heavily—eight times to 10 times as much—than other machines are used around the country. Therefore any one of these machines is much worse than those that are being taken out under the sinking-lid policy that has been praised so much by members opposite. This bill will result in more of the most harmful gambling. It will result in families losing significant assets including their houses. It will result in family breakdowns. It will result in suicides. It will result in murder. We have seen the evidence of all of that already around the activities of Skycity. We have seen that on a repeated basis and what we have opposite is a Government where not one of them will use their conscience. Peseta Sam Lotu-Iiga I challenge you to use your conscience. Jonathan Young who used to be a person of principle used to preach anti-gambling and what do we have here? We have someone who is promoting more gambling. I say to Jonathan Young use your conscience. Stand up for what you used to believe in and stop being a toady to the Prime Minister in an approach to try to get a Cabinet position which we all know he will never get.