Roy Heather: Gambling Amendment Bill — First Reading 
Roy Heather: Gambling Amendment Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:622;Page:18109] 
HEATHER ROY (ACT) 
: 
 I rise to speak to this first reading of the Gambling Amendment Bill. ACT New Zealand will support this bill going to the select committee but we are disappointed to see yet another bill being debated under urgency to rectify legislation that really has only just come into place. We spent a long time debating the Gambling Bill in 2003 when it was passed. It came into force on 1 July 2004 and now just a few short months down the track we are racing yet another amendment bill through Parliament just before the Christmas break. 
As I said ACT will support this measure going to the select committee in order to hear the arguments and public submissions but we are very disappointed that as several members of other parties have said this legislation was first proposed to be part of the Statutes Amendment Bill (No 4). The letter that came from the Minister of Internal Affairs was very brief and gave very little away as to the reasons this measure was to be put into place. For my part I answered the letter on behalf of the ACT party by saying that presumably the Government did have reasons for a law change that it thought were sound but that the letter did not indicate what those were. So there we were just meant to take in blind faith that the measure was the right thing to do. In my response to the Minister I invited the officials to come and meet with me and I asked for all papers on this matter that showed both the pros and cons as to why liquor and gambling should be mixed as the Minister was proposing. I said I would be perfectly happy to revisit the measure if that evidence was put forward to us. I am not quite sure what has gone on here. Either the Minister is not very keen on the measure or perhaps the officials are not but nothing has been forthcoming. 
I must say that I was disturbed by the number of organisations particularly licensing trusts in the community that contacted my office and asked for an appointment. I met with some of their representatives who told me that ACT was the only party opposing the statutes amendment measure but here today debating it in urgency I find that other parties have exactly the same story to tell. They have been approached told they were the only ones opposing the matter and completely misled— 
Hon Member 
: What other parties? 
HEATHER ROY 
: Apparently New Zealand First was told it was the only party opposing the matter. I had no idea that the National Party had also been told that but a member made a very strong speech today saying it had. I understand that the Green Party was also told it was the only party not supporting it. Anyway that is by the by. Things have turned out exactly as they should but it is disappointing that we have this amendment bill so shortly after the core legislation has been passed. 
Like Mr Dail Jones I too have several questions for the Minister. Mr Jones said that his questions were around the amount of money being spent on gambling. Mine are of a much more fundamental nature. I would like to hear from the Government just why it thinks that liquor provisions and gambling provisions should be mixed. It is not clear to me why that should be the case although it would seem that in many cases the licensing trusts that operate in very small communities might well have the bulk of expertise in both areas so perhaps there are good reasons for that. But those reasons certainly have not been put forward by the Government and promoted in any positive sort of way. 
The licensing trusts themselves are obviously very keen on this measure. It is important to look back on the history slightly. Licensing trust members are elected under the Sale of Liquor Act and their role is to operate businesses in the hospitality industry. Licensing trusts as we have heard are not eligible to operate gaming machines under the Gambling Act and the Government is obviously admitting now that there was an oversight when that Act was passed. So this bill has been put forward to try to rectify that matter. It is important to remember that there may well be some conflict of interest with licensing trust members making decisions about the provision and distribution of funds from gaming machines. That is something that should quite rightly be discussed in some detail. It is good that this bill is now coming before the House and will be passed on to the select committee where it will be debated in the right and proper way and where the public and those with interests in these areas will be able to put forward their submissions. 
So ACT New Zealand will support this measure going to the select committee. Beyond that we are making absolutely no commitment. We want to hear the arguments. I was hopeful that the officials for the Government might have been able to give us those arguments and as I said we were certainly prepared to revisit the issue in relation to the Statutes Amendment Bill (No 4). However I think that this course of action is probably the best one and ACT will support this legislation going to the select committee.