Gambling Harm Reduction Bill - Speech from Te Ururoa Flavell
te-pati-maori
Thu Jul 11 2013 12:00:00 GMT+1200 (New Zealand Standard Time)
Gambling Harm Reduction Bill - Speech from Te Ururoa Flavell
Thursday, 11 July 2013, 8:57 am
Speech: The Maori Party
Gambling Harm Reduction (Amendment) Bill – Second Reading
Te Ururoa Flavell, MP for Waiariki
Wednesday 10 July 2013
I move, That the Gambling (Gambling Harm Reduction) Amendment Bill be now read a second time.
Mr Speaker, I can not come to this debate, without remembering the passionate advocacy of the late Maureen Waaka, who inspired me to focus on the issue of problem gambling as one of the greatest social hazards impacting on our communities. Moe mai e te kuia.
This Bill was born out of a desire to minimise the harm of gambling on vulnerable communities, as well as ensuring the returns from gambling remained in the communities from which the money was generated.
First and foremost, gambling-related harm is detrimental to the wellbeing, the economic outlook and the community health of far too many New Zealanders. The Māori Party stepped up to that challenge – and this Bill is the result. We do not have the luxury of sitting back and waiting for a better day – we know that problem gambling severely compromises the potential of whānau- and we must act now.
For when gambling gets out of control it is not just an individual who loses– whole whanau and communities suffer. Problem gambling has devastating consequences on individuals and whānau. Those consequences can be demonstrated in relationship breakdowns, financial ruin, psychological distress, criminal offending, imprisonment, and suicide.
Why then, did the Māori Party take up this call?
Advertisement - scroll to continue reading
Over twenty years ago, the very first gambling prevalence study in New Zealand identified that Maori had at least three times the risk of problem gambling of non-Maori.
In the early 1990s, through the provision of a gambling telephone helpline and gambling counselling services, it was identified that Maori and in particular Maori women, were increasingly seeking help with problems with gambling. Our rangatahi are also not spared the impact of this addiction - Maori youth are six times more likely to develop gambling problems than non-Maori youths.
All in all the glaring reality of these statistics prompted us to commit to a goal shared widely in the problem gambling sector – to prevent and minimise gambling harm.
I make these preliminary comments because I want to make it quite clear where our motivation for addressing problem gambling comes from – he tangata, he tangata, he tangata. What then will this bill do to address the harmful impact of gambling upon the peoples of this land?
When this bill was introduced in September 2010, its purpose was very clear – to provide local communities with more power to determine where pokie machines may be sited and in how the proceeds can be distributed.
Almost three years down the track, I believe that the vision of a gambling-free future, will be strengthened by the initiatives advanced in this bill, including the intention to:
• · cut rorts and conflicts of interest out of the gambling sector;
• · introduce harm minimisation devices – which can now be done through regulations;
• · have a minimum amount returned to the community where the gambling occurred – which can now be done through regulations and
• · get pokies out of low socio-economic communities – now venues will be able to transfer out of these areas where supported by the community and the council.
The original Bill wanted to cut out racing and racing-stake money as an authorised charitable purpose. The Government disagreed, saying that it would have too much of a negative impact on the racing industry. That’s a fight that will continue at another time.
The original bill had a condition that at least 80% of the funds derived from class four gambling would be distributed to the community from which it came. The Government supported the idea of making sure funds from pokies went back in to their communities of origin and the bill now enables this to happen through regulation.
The original Bill required territorial authorities to take control of distributing proceeds from gambling. The Government agreed that there needs to be greater transparency of the current grants system - taking away the risk of ‘rorts’ and dodgy dealings – and this will be part of the future work programme.
The original Bill allowed for ‘public sentiment and evidence of harm’ to be a specific criteria when territorial authorities are developing their venue policies and for that to be a reason for reducing the number of pokie machines in that area. The Government didn’t agree with this approach BUT they wanted to, instead, allow venues (with permission from territorial authorities) to move their pokie machine out of harm’s way.
And the original Bill wanted harm minimisation devices to be put into all gambling machines, like, pre-commitment cards and player tracking systems. The Government have now supported the development of regulations to support the implementation of harm minimisation technology.
Let me be the first in this second reading debate to state the obvious – the bill that we are debating today is far less impressive than my original intent. That’s right, there is no denying it.
I want to acknowledge my thanks to Graham Ramsay and the Problem Gambling Foundation; and indeed the mighty advocacy of the People Before Pokies campaign who have championed the cause of reducing gambling harm so clearly and in such a compelling way.
In doing so, I want to also recognise the incredible impact of the experience, the advice and the wisdom from right across the motu.
The Commerce Committee considered five thousand submissions from interested groups and individuals and another thirty thousand form submissions. They also heard 159 submissions, at hearings in Wellington, Christchurch, and Auckland. Even if nothing else, the level of public participation has been truly awesome and this parliament is better for their contribution.
I know that this bill does not live up to the ideal we all had – but I have chosen not to walk away in defeat. My approach to political reform is to chisel away, bit by bit, to persevere, to do the work necessary to achieve change – no matter how incremental.
Tērā pea he pakupaku noa te namu, engari ko tana wero, kāore
As we say, even the smallest of mosquito can make an impact.
I wasn’t about to pull out on those communities who desperately need change; to turn my back on the whānau who have come to me in need.
So I started working with the Minister of Internal Affairs, Hon Chris Tremain on how to advance the many issues that my Bill sought to address – and I mihi to him today for his genuine commitment to working together to reform the legislation.
The result? Well, it is a broad package of class four gambling reforms that are given further strength within the regulatory and legislative reforms proposed by the Government. The changes announced by Minister Tremain are a direct result of my Bill, which was a catalyst for action. We placed the issue on the agenda, and this wider package is the result of our hard work.
Where we had achieved broad agreement we made changes, and I am pleased we have. I have been able to negotiate a series of changes that lift the percentage return to the community; that address conflicts of interests and rorts; and that will ensure gambling proceeds are distributed in the areas raised. Those changes are important reforms that were not on the radar until my bill came along.
Perhaps one of the most significant impacts of this bill is that it has created the public climate for urgency in addressing problem gambling.
In this sense a new Bill to be introduced later in the year by the Minister, and the regulatory changes that have arisen out of my bill are important signals of an appetite for change. And if I had the right of reply to all those who have chosen to publicly withdraw their support for this bill, I would urge first that they look at the wider package – and the eight new measures that have arisen, provoked by the impact of the Gambling Harm Reduction Bill.
The key drivers of my bill were to address rorts and conflicts of interest; and concern around gambling-related harm; both of which we are addressing.
But we were always clear that a wider strategy was required, including broader legislative reform, and a public education campaign.
Mr Speaker, just to bring us back to the context for this bill. Every day New Zealanders lose $5.5 million on gambling – that is around two billion dollars every year. Should we ignore that reality? Walk away from this bill on ‘principle’? The Māori Party says no.
More than eighteen thousand New Zealanders are problem gamblers. And of course – none of these individuals operate in isolation. Almost three percent of New Zealand adults – close to 90,000 people - have experienced problems due to someone’s gambling in the previous year. Should we gamble on their future – wish them good luck and walk away - because we weren’t able to achieve all we wanted with this bill? The Māori Party says no.
We are in this for our whanau and our communities. We are not bowing out, we are continuing the tough fight. We have gained some ground. That’s what you can achieve when you’re sitting at the table.
ENDS
Advertisement - scroll to continue reading
a.supporter:hover {background:#EC4438!important;} @media screen and (max-width: 480px) { #byline-block div.byline-block {padding-right:16px;}}
Using Scoop for work?
Scoop is free for personal use, but you’ll need a licence for work use. This is part of our Ethical Paywall and how we fund Scoop. Join today with plans starting from less than $3 per week, plus gain access to exclusive Pro features.
Join Pro Individual Find out more
Find more from The Maori Party on InfoPages.