Opening Address to New Zealand Gaming Expo,
SkyCity Convention Centre,
Auckland

Thank you for inviting me to speak once again at this important event for the gaming industry in New Zealand.

I am particularly delighted to see that the theme for today’s conference session is community perspectives – after all, you spring from and are part of local communities, and it is therefore essential that you take your responsibilities to local communities seriously and the inclusion of this conference theme demonstrates a positive commitment on your behalf to do just that.

I note you will be hearing from a variety of speakers this morning who all have valuable contribution to make when considering community perspectives of the gaming industry.

As of March this year there were just over 19,000 gaming machines located in pubs and clubs throughout New Zealand.

This means that your products are to be found in communities the length and breadth of the country.

Because of this, you have a significant role to play in supporting the wellbeing and development of those communities.

I am in no doubt there has been a substantial shift in the attitudes and the approach taken by the Class 4 Gaming industry to fulfill its community obligations since the Gambling Act was introduced in 2003.

For me, this was one of the key outcomes I was seeking through my involvement with developing the Act, and I want to acknowledge the steps you have taken in that time.

Although I am broadly satisfied with the way the legislation is working, I am nonetheless mindful that there is a constant pressure for all gaming machine operators to continue to find new and better ways to work with communities and to reducing the potential for harm to individuals, families and communities, if gaming products are misused.

While we should never forget that the vast majority of people who enjoy playing the machines are unlikely to face any problems or harm, we do have a responsibility to ensure we have appropriate plans in place to deal with the minority for whom gambling becomes a problem and a serious addiction, with disastrous impacts on them, their families and those around them..

Of course, there is a constant balance to be struck here between ensuring the rights of the majority are upheld, and meeting the concerns of the at-risk populations and their affected families and workmates.

I am mindful that it can be dangerous for a politician to call for moderation on matters relating to alcohol and gaming, lest one be accused of being in the pocket of the particular industry sector.

As an Associate Health Minister, I am also mindful of the fact there are those who see my role on such issues to be no more than an advocate for those who are adversely affected, rather than to take a responsible overview of the broader social picture.

Well, I am sorry to disappoint in that respect.

I am not here to be anyone’s advocate, but to take a dispassionate view of the relationship between the gaming sector, the wider community, and those who suffer a problem gambling addiction, and to promote the most effective health related policies to deal such situations, and I make no apology for such an approach on my part.

As you will be aware, the Law Commission has just released its report on New Zealand liquor laws, and with it a massive number of recommendations for change, which in a number of areas will be of more than passing interest to you.

I am not going to comment on these in any detail this morning, as the Government is still digesting the report, and will make its response known in due course, but the issues I have just raised are equally as pertinent in respect of that debate too.

The bottom line for me – and I suspect everyone in this room – is that whatever laws Parliament passes or rules we put in place have to be workable, and capable of dealing with the issues of concern.

I firmly believe we fail ourselves and our fellow citizens if in such instances we put in place laws which look good, “feel” good, and serve mainly to salve our national conscience that we are “doing something”, but which are otherwise counter-productive or unworkable.

That has been New Zealand’s problem for too long in such cases, and I hope that as we embark upon the latest round following Sir Geoffrey’s report, those days will be put behind us, and common sense and reason will apply.

Looking around the country at the moment one sees some excellent regional examples of the gaming industry working constructively with the DIA, local authorities, patrons and problem gambling providers to support people who have identified themselves as problem gamblers.

One such example is the multi venue exclusion process initiated in Queenstown.

However, there does appear to be some inconsistency around implementing host responsibility activities between different venues and regions.

The Queenstown example is a relatively simple but effective way to strengthen host responsibility and could easily be introduced across a number of smaller centres in New Zealand.

I have a dual interest in the state of your industry – both as Associate Minister of Health and also as Minister of Revenue, and I know from both perspectives that your sector has not been immune from the recent economic downturn.

Gaming machine expenditure in the country’s 1500 pubs and clubs for the year to December 2009 decreased 5.2 per cent from $912.6 million in 2008 to $865.5 million in 2009.

At the same time, expenditure also decreased for both Casino gambling and racing and sports betting although to a lesser extent than that observed for Non-Casino gaming machines, while Lotteries products experienced a dramatic increase in expenditure.

However, despite the decrease in gaming machine expenditure, gaming machines are still the mode of gambling most people enjoy and, unfortunately, most associated with problem gambling.

This conference provides an opportunity for the Class 4 gaming industry to unite and share ideas about what works so that you are able to make real progress addressing the problems associated with non casino gaming machine gambling in New Zealand.

Demonstrating such a commitment to reducing problem gambling will go a long way towards improving public perceptions of the industry and enhance your cause, - that is, enabling the vast majority who gamble without problems to continue to do so, while at the same time minimising gambling harm, and returning as much funding to the community as possible.

This is probably the moment to raise a perverse problem which has arisen within the charitable and gaming sectors, and it goes something like this.

I am coming across a number of community organizations who have sought and been denied registration by the Charities Commission as charities because for one reason or another they do not comply with the provisions of the Charities Commission’s legislation.

When pushed as to why they have sought registration in the first place many have told me that they did not really want to be registered as charities, but only sought registration because local gaming trusts are now saying that they will only make donations to community organizations that are registered with the Charities Commission.

The logic behind this appears that the trusts have taken to heart the criticism over the years by some politicians and others that some of their funding decisions have been questionable, and so have decided that the best way to protect themselves from such criticism in the future is to limit funding to legally registered charities.

Such an outcome was never intended, and has the potential to have a most detrimental effect on community development.

If, for example, the local kids’ football team cannot get a grant from the local trust for a grant for team jerseys or an end of season trip away because the trust will now only fund charities and their sports club is not a charity, and will never be registered by the Charities Commission as such, the situation has clearly become absurd.

The whole premise of charity gaming in New Zealand was that the proceeds would be returned to the local community, and this type of practice is at worst making that impossible, or at best limiting the availability of assistance and support to only a small community pool.

Either way, it is time to stop.

My advice is there is no legal basis to such an approach, and I am therefore calling on those trusts that have adopted this practice to cease doing so, and to get back to the days where community projects, however big or small, were funded on the basis on the merits of the project, not the legal status of the organization seeking funding.

The implicit partnership has always been that gaming machine proceeds were available for distribution for the betterment of local communities.

I want to see that partnership restored – without restriction – so our communities can flourish.

As you know, we are about to strike the problem gambling levy for the next three years.

That levy is struck according to a relatively complex formula, to cover the costs of treatment and support services for those affected by problem gambling.

While I am not in a position to disclose the new levy details this morning, there are a couple of things I should say that will be of interest to you.

At the time the levy is struck, the Ministry of Health will also publish its action plan for problem gambling through to 2013.

You will be aware of previous criticisms of the quality and credibility of some of the programmes funded previously.

While I am satisfied that those particular issues have been resolved, I remain concerned to ensure that the programmes and services we fund with the money you provide through the levy are up to it in terms of providing proper value for money, and are achieving the objectives set for them.

For that reason, I have asked the Ministry of Health to be especially vigilant that all the programmes that we support meet a clear value for money test, and it is absolutely right that I do so.

The Ministry’s problem gambling strategy is all about risk minimization, and treating effectively those who suffer from problem gambling addictions, so the services and programmes we provide to support the strategy have to be rigorous and able to stand up to scrutiny.

There is no cause for complacency.

While the number of problem gamblers is comparatively small – there were just over 6,700 presentations last year – the numbers are increasing, with last year’s figures representing a 25% increase on the previous year.

Of concern for your sector must be the fact that according to the Ministry’s data, gaming machines still feature disproportionately in gambling harm statistics.

As we would work through the next few years, I look forward to working with your sector on a constructive basis to address the issues I have identified this morning.

ENDS

© Scoop Media