Online Casino Gambling Bill

I present a legislative statement on the Online Casino Gambling Bill.

SPEAKER: That legislative statement is published under the authority of the House and can be found on the parliamentary website.

Hon BROOKE VAN VELDEN: I move, That the Online Casino Gambling Bill be now read a first time. I nominate the Governance and Administration Committee to consider the bill. At the appropriate time, I intend to move that the bill be reported to the House by 17 November 2025.

I’m pleased to be here today to present the Online Casino Gambling Bill. This bill is about ensuring that New Zealanders who wish to play on online casinos can do so on regulated websites in a safer market, where operators follow our requirements for harm minimisation and consumer protection and contribute financially to New Zealand. This bill will allow for up to 15 vetted and licensed operators to conduct and advertise their online casino platform in New Zealand while prohibiting unlicensed online casinos from operating in New Zealand.

Online casino gambling has been around for a long time in New Zealand. Every day, Kiwis are gambling on offshore websites with thousands of options available at the click of a button. Data from the Ministry of Health shows that 156,000 New Zealand adults have participated in online overseas gambling in the past year, and this number is likely increasing. Unlike physical casinos in New Zealand, these online operators do not need to meet harm prevention and minimisation standards. They don’t even need to check if the people playing are of age. They also don’t have any consumer protection regulations, so someone gambling on these websites might be unable to withdraw their winnings or money that they’ve deposited.

These online casinos are also not currently contributing to the cost of providing support services for gambling harm in New Zealand. This bill will require all online casino operators licensed in New Zealand to contribute 1.24 percent of their profits to the problem gambling levy, which is used to fund services to reduce gambling harm.

This bill will establish a licensing process to enable the Secretary for Internal Affairs to grant up to 15 licences to allow operators to conduct online casino gambling. Companies that do not receive a licence will not be allowed to operate or advertise in New Zealand, and could face penalties for doing so. Allocating up to 15 licences will provide consumers who wish to gamble with sufficient variety and choice while maintaining a competitive market. This is important in order to facilitate channelling consumers to the regulated market and away from any illegal operators. It will also minimise the regulatory burden of the scheme and ensure that the Department of Internal Affairs, as the regulator, is well positioned to enforce the system and take action against any black market operators.

The bill does allow licensed operators to advertise with limitations, including not advertising to children. This is, again, part of channelling customers towards safer regulated operators and away from illegal ones. Detailed rules about the form, content, timing, location, and volume of advertisements, as well as the use of third-party endorsements, will be set out in the regulations. This follows a very similar process and practice to the Gambling Act 2003, where the specific rules are set out in regulations rather than legislation, so they are easy to update as technology changes.

One of the biggest harm prevention changes that this bill will introduce is to require online gambling operators to verify that all of their players are aged 18 and over, to stop children from accessing these sites. Operators will need to use a suitable age verification tool before customers can play on those websites. Both Lotto and the TAB currently use online age verification systems effectively, as well as many other gambling companies around the world. While adults may choose to gamble—and we want them to be able to do so safely—I’ve been very clear that I do not want children gambling.

Operators will also be required to exclude problem gamblers, whether the player identifies themselves as having a problem or the operator identifies them as problem gamblers. The detailed requirements for this will be set out in the regulations.

Preventing gambling harm is the primary purpose of this bill. However, it is also important that online gambling companies offering services to New Zealanders pay their fair share of tax. Licensed operators will be required to pay GST and the offshore gambling duty of 12 percent, which goes to the Crown to fund core services. This is in addition to the 1.24 percent of profits which must be paid to the problem gambling levy to fund support services for gambling harm in New Zealand.

The Department of Internal Affairs will enforce the new regulatory system armed with a suite of penalties, from formal warnings up to licence cancellations, for any operators that do not follow the rules. The department will be able to request information from companies, investigate potential breaches, and take action where appropriate. Fines of up to $5 million can be applied for breaches of the rules. I am confident that the department will be able to carry out this role as it is already the regulator for physical gambling in New Zealand, such as with casinos and pokies.

The cost of setting up and running the regulatory team will be fully cost recovered from fees from the licensed operators. The department will also have strong relationships with similar regulators overseas to help take action against any offshore companies that breach our laws.

New Zealand is one of the last OECD countries to regulate online gambling. This gives us an advantage in that we can learn from other jurisdictions about how to appropriately and safely regulate our market.

I’m proud to introduce this bill to take action on regulating online casinos. I know that many New Zealanders are interested in this bill and will want to have a say on the proposals. I hope that everyone who wants to have input will submit during the select committee process.

In conclusion, this bill will ensure that New Zealand has controls in place to keep Kiwis safe if they want to participate in online casino gambling. I commend this bill to the House.

Before I call the member, can I just indicate to the House, as notified to parties, this will be treated as a personal vote. Whips, of course, can vote according to proxies they hold.

Talofa, Mr Speaker. I rise as Labour’s spokesperson on internal affairs to give my contribution. I support the regulation of online casino gambling; in fact, this work began under the previous Government. However, I oppose this bill.

I am concerned that this bill opens up doors to offshore gambling casinos without a strong plan for harm reduction. Everyone should be able to stay healthy and get the care when they need it, and having an online gambling addiction is no different. I want to see that the Government does more to protect vulnerable people from online gambling harm, particularly in vulnerable communities such as Māori, Pasifika, ethnic, and Asian communities, who are way overrepresented in gambling harm.

My concern, specifically, about this bill is that it allows far too many online casino licences: 15. Why the 15? With information from IRD, it shows that 36 offshore online gambling operators pay GST in New Zealand, with 15 of these accounting for over 90 percent of the total GST from this type of business, and it appears that the Minister of Internal Affairs has taken this approach of least resistance. Does the Minister have sufficient focus on preventing gambling harm—in fact, the internal best practice on gambling harm reduction, like offshore in Australia, which has introduced better, stronger measures on gambling harm reduction?

It is important that the Government is serious about supporting the reduction of online harm and, specifically, consumer protection, because the bill in its current form does not address those particular actions wholeheartedly. They are listed vaguely. The bill needs stronger provisions and a commitment from the Government to measures to reduce online gambling harm, specifically in primary legislation. We want—I want—New Zealanders to be protected from online gambling harm, and also New Zealand consumers must be protected.

We’ve seen even today that the Prime Minister has been weak in his leadership, and it’s the same reflection on this bill—it’s weak. There are many cuts—

SPEAKER: You can’t make a statement like that.

LEMAUGA LYDIA SOSENE: Apologies, Mr Speaker.

SPEAKER: The member will withdraw and apologise.

LEMAUGA LYDIA SOSENE: I withdraw that, Mr Speaker. But what I wanted to say is there have been many—

Tim Costley: And apologise.

SPEAKER: She has apologised.

LEMAUGA LYDIA SOSENE: There have been many cuts on women’s pay. It’s hard to see a doctor or a nurse, and the price of getting medical assistance has become more expensive. Whilst families across New Zealand struggle with the cost of living, this is the one bill that is going to make New Zealanders waste more money from their hard-earned cash through the exploitation from and the exposure to more online gambling, and this is causing gambling harm to Kiwis every day.

I have a particular concern that Kiwis cannot focus on making good decisions, having peace of mind on paying their bills, and caring for their families because many have lost jobs and businesses as a vital plan for their future. Instead, what we have is that in this bill, the Government is going to open New Zealand up to a saturation of online casino gambling licences, meaning that New Zealanders will be open to more exploitation and more online gambling harm. Why is the Government not protecting New Zealanders? What is the Government thinking? Fifteen Government licences or platforms—[Interruption]

SPEAKER: Right, someone is going to leave the House. That’s quite unacceptable. Your time will be extended by 30 seconds.

LEMAUGA LYDIA SOSENE: Thank you, Mr Speaker. This bill will be problematic in New Zealand. It will bring in short-term profits and convenience, and it will have a long-term negative effect. We know that it’s an unregulated market, and I support a regulated market, but not with this bill in its current form. I do not support this bill.

E te Māngai o te Whare, tēnei te mihi maioha ki a koe. Ki a koutou ngā Minita o te Kāwanatanga me ngā mema o Pāremata, kei te mihi ki a koutou katoa hoki.

[Mr Speaker, this is a most gracious greeting to you. To you, the Ministers of the Government and the members of Pāremata, I acknowledge all of you also.]

Te Pāti Kākāriki have long held that all gambling legislation must focus primarily on the elimination of harm. It is the industry itself and its insidious tendrils of coercion that devastate individuals, whānau, and communities. We must focus on addressing the root causes of these harms and always work to protect the humanity of those who have been caught up in its web. Here the system is broken, not the people who are suffering under it.

Online gambling is a new, rapidly evolving and changing frontier. It brings 24/7 gambling into people’s houses and allows it to be easily hidden from friends and whānau by being accessible on small devices such as cellphones. As with many things online, there are challenges in validating and regulating. People can pose as whoever they want to be online, especially in instances where gambling is surreptitiously embedded in otherwise seemingly innocuous gaming apps. Left unchecked and without appropriate regulation, it allows an environment for young people to have unlimited access to online gambling sites. Not doing enough to regulate online gambling effectively isolates those most vulnerable to developing problem-gambling habits. This risk and its correlating harms will only compound, as problem gambling amongst those who gamble online is 10 times higher than that of the general population.

We know that, due to predatory and targeted marketing tactics, Māori and Pasifika communities are more vulnerable to the economically, psychologically, socially, and spiritually destructive nature of gambling. This is a Te Tiriti issue. Despite her words in the House today, I note that the Minister’s paper to Cabinet regarding this bill explicitly states that tax revenue is a key factor driving this regulation, rather than harm reduction. This is a fatal error. We must centre the lives and needs of communities, especially those most affected by decisions such as this. Regulation and tax generation are mechanisms to achieve that, but they should not be the primary objective. Legislation must prioritise people, not profit. It is appalling, in an industry which is explicitly affecting Māori more than any other population group, that this piece of proposed legislation has utterly ignored the voice and expertise of Māori communities. Iwi leaders expressed that it is astounding, disappointing, and concerning that the Minister has failed to meaningfully work with tangata whenua on this bill.

The Problem Gambling Foundation, harm reduction advocates, and community experts have all called for this bill to go further. If she were here, I would ask the Minister to consider banning gambling advertising altogether.

SPEAKER: The member will recognise that it is totally inappropriate to reflect on the presence or otherwise of anyone in the House. Withdraw and apologise for that statement.

BENJAMIN DOYLE: I withdraw and apologise for that statement. The Problem Gambling Foundation and all others have asked for this bill to go further. I asked the Minister to consider banning gambling advertising altogether, as this is one of the most direct and ubiquitous coercion techniques, which directly leads to harm. Why not also redistribute a far greater proportion of the profits generated through tax and licensing directly to the organisations and advocates working on the ground to reduce gambling harms?

I stand here to voice the Greens’ strong criticism of this bill for its flimsy and ineffective attempt at reducing the devastating harms of online problem gambling. We have an opportunity to meaningfully enact the advice and recommendations of experts and those who have had experiences of harmful gambling. We have an opportunity to prioritise human wellbeing rather than the profits of the offshore gambling industry. However, we understand that, while this bill only scratches the surface of what is possible in gambling harm reduction, it is a small first step in the right direction. The Greens will support this bill to select committee with the intention of engaging fulsomely and critically with our colleagues from across the House in order to strengthen this proposed legislation.

Tim Costley: Mr Speaker?

BENJAMIN DOYLE: For that reason, I commend this bill to the House.

Tim Costley: Mr Speaker?

I’ll call you when I’m ready and not before. Some people on that side of the House need to be just a little bit more respectful of how the Chair works.

Pleasing to hear some kind of guarded support from the Green Party. I’m not quite sure where Labour landed with their speech. Look, I’m not much of a fan of gambling, and as—

Arena Williams: Then vote with your conscience.

TIM COSTLEY: Oh, well, if you listen, that’s where we’re getting to. As the last speaker, Benjamin Doyle, said, the rapid pace of change with online gambling: you know, it is deregulated, it’s all run from overseas—listed off a whole bunch of things that they’re concerned about. That’s the whole point of this bill, though. The whole point is there is no regulation; we should have some. There are no rules that say you should ascertain the identification of that person or that they’re 18; maybe we should have some. There is no money coming in to get channelled back into the harm that can come from gambling; we should do that. That’s what this bill does, and if members opposite actually bothered to read it, they might be more engaged in the process.

So I’m commending this bill. Let’s take it to select committee; let’s do that, and let’s actually bring in some regulation to temper this rather than just fighting based on some kind of ideology.

Thank you, Mr Speaker. I rise on behalf of New Zealand First to support the Online Casino Gambling Bill. This bill is to stop the unregulated situation that we find ourselves in at the moment. This bill will create a robust framework to regulate online casino gambling and protect consumers and minimise harm. We want to make sure that only trustworthy operators are allowed to operate in the online gambling market. These trustworthy operators must be subject and accountable to New Zealand standards, not overseas standards. Currently, this industry is very prone to exploitation and we’re keen to bring this to an end.

Sending this to the select committee is the right thing—to hear submissions, to hear concerns, and to see if this piece of legislation goes in the right direction. One concern we do have is what we have heard from other speakers is up to 15 licences, and that will be dealt with over three stages of a licence process. It will be really interesting to hear from people around, actually, if we do need 15 operators in this space or up to 15 operators. Maybe it is a case that we start off more with three or five. That is process, I think, we can flesh out through the select committee.

We’ve also heard it is a growing pastime of a number of people to use this. It is a 24/7 access to this gambling. It’s not necessarily like racehorses or Lotto in that sense, but 24/7. We do understand that the harm—especially for our young people if they can get access to this, but even just harm for the general population. So we’ve got to make sure that we’ve got some safeguards in place.

New Zealand First does believe in balancing the economic opportunities, because we have heard that there will be an increased tax take, but also the social responsibility that goes around that. This bill achieves—to an extent at the moment—trying to get the right type of balance. The focus on the harm minimisation and the consumer protection aligns with our commitment to community wellbeing. On that, I will commend the bill to the House, and we look forward to hearing through select committee the different views from people that go through that process. Thank you.

Tēnā koe e te Pīka. I tēnei tū tuatahi ōku, otirā mō Te Pāti Māori i tō mātou hokinga mai ki te Whare i te wehenga ake nei o tō mātou tuahine, a Takutaimoana. E te tuahine, e moe, okioki.

Hoki rawa mai ki a tāua, e te Pīka, tēnā koe. Tēnā hoki tātou.

E tū ana ahau ki te whakapuaki i ngā whakaaro o Te Pāti Māori mō tēnei tūāhuatanga, nō reira kia tahuri au ki ngā kōrero.

[Thank you, Mr Speaker. With this first speech of mine, indeed for the Māori Party upon our return to the House following the departure of our sister, Takutaimoana. To my sister, sleep well, take your rest.

Returning to you and I, Mr Speaker, greetings. Greetings also to all of us.

I stand to express the opinions of the Māori Party regarding this phenomenon, therefore let me turn to the statements.]

Although it may be true that a regulated online gambling industry is better than an unregulated one, gambling does nothing for Māori. Never has, never will, and neither will this bill. We do not need overseas companies profiting off our misery, and we cannot support a bill that will legalise the exploitation of our people and all of the people of Aotearoa. The Minister expects that most, if not all, of the licences will be won by offshore companies, who are under absolutely no obligation to reinvest any of the income derived back into communities in Aotearoa. The bill is a simple tax-raising exercise, and if this Government is involved in deciding how to spend that money, we know that the communities that need it the most won’t see a cent.

The ministry’s own evidence shows us that the bill will have a disproportionate impact on Māori, Pasifika, rangatahi, and our whānau with lifelong disabilities. Māori are more than three times more likely to be entrapped by problem gambling than other New Zealanders, and problem gambling has had a devastating impact on the cohesion, cultural identity, and financial stability of whānau Māori for generations. Pacific peoples are more than twice as likely to be entrapped by problem gambling than other New Zealanders, also. Gambling harm is already ripping through our communities. We don’t need a band-aid fix that legalises and regulates these harmful practices; we need to stop enabling these corporations altogether.

Unfortunately, this bill only promotes pure international corporate exploitation, with no positive social contribution at all. For sure, there will be a monetary return, but only to the few. Almost half of all rangatahi Māori between the ages of 16 and 24 have gambled in the last year, and they make up 15 percent of all moderate- to high-risk gamblers. This is something that we can’t afford to promote, increase, or exacerbate at all. People with lifelong disabilities have a higher risk of developing harmful gambling behaviour. Social isolation, unemployment, and limited income are all risk factors that contribute to gambling harm. This Government has already taken away the minimum wage pay top-up for our disabled whānau, and now they are legalising a gambling regime that could potentially do even more harm. It’s not acceptable.

Online casino companies are offering Māori influencers hundreds of thousands of dollars to promote online gambling and target our whānau. Hāpai Te Hauora Chief Operating Officer Jason Alexander is quoted as saying this: “These gambling companies are [now] using Māori influencers to reach Māori audiences. It’s not just harmful—it’s calculated, it’s manipulative, and it shows they have no regard for the wellbeing of whānau [Māori or the people of Aotearoa].” This bill does nothing to prevent licensed operators from engaging in these predatory practices. In fact, the Government are legalising these practices through this bill. It shouldn’t be allowed. He’s also on the record as saying, “What’s really worrying is that these same companies—the ones illegally targeting our people now—could be operating legally here [in Aotearoa] as early as next year. Their current behaviour shows exactly how little they care about whānau, and if this is how they act before regulation, [then] what will they do once they’re in the system?”

We support the cause of Hāpai Te Hauora to ban gambling advertising in Aotearoa completely. We also cannot support a bill whose department didn’t even bother to do a proper Te Tiriti o Waitangi analysis. Instead, they relied on a July 2024 Cabinet paper which included a population implications assessment.

SPEAKER: The member’s time has passed.

Thank you, Mr Speaker. I rise in support of the Government bill, the Online Casino Gambling Bill. This bill will provide some regulation in the space of the wild, wild west that is international-based gambling in New Zealand. It does real harm in our communities. At the moment, there is no regulation, and therefore we are creating a method by which things will become illegal—not just creating a path for them to be legalised but also, we point out, everything that’s not within those licence boundaries will be illegal. So I commend the bill to the House.

Thank you, Mr Speaker. I stand today a bit disappointed, really, with the bill that we have in front of us. The reason for that is that this was really an opportunity to regulate an unregulated market and actually address the main issue with online gambling, which is online harm.

Unfortunately, the good work started under the previous Government in order to regulate and make a reasonable environment where there are a few operators able to be regulated and also provide a significant amount of time and resources to address gambling harm—on the contrary, this bill that we now have before us looks to allow 15 different operators licences within New Zealand. The result of that will be a change in a situation where we are facing ads constantly when we open our phone, when we open our laptop, when our kids log on to YouTube, for online gambling. Unlike the situation now, where that’s technically illegal to advertise for online gambling, this will now be permitted after this bill has passed.

My personal view, as this is a conscience vote, is that there should be a regulated system in New Zealand for online gambling, but, regretfully, what we have in front of us is only going to make that situation worse. Fifteen is far too many. When the last Government looked at this bill, they were considering around—I understand—three. So there’s a significant difference there in what people were looking at.

I think perhaps one of the reasons that the Minister has ended a little bit off the mark on this bill has been because when this was first introduced—and we see that from the two regulatory impact statements; the first one clearly states that there hasn’t been sufficient time to consult with the people who this would affect. So there hasn’t been feedback from public consultation on this proposal. And by the time the second regulatory impact statement was made to Cabinet, the decisions had already been made about the regime that was going to be put in place. Unfortunately, this regime will allow far too many online gambling operators to operate in New Zealand.

We know online gambling does harm. We know that gambling does harm. We know that this is not something that we want to encourage people into. So I think a reasonable stand to take would be to have a regulated market that really looks at the harm it causes. But the environment that this bill will create, as I’ve said, is one where we are constantly faced with advertising for online gambling.

There is a bit of irony when I look at what this bill will do and the recent statements that the Government has made in relation to preventing online harm for children and young people. The Government has said that they will have a Government bill making sure that social media is only available to those over 16. This bill—although technically you’re only able to participate in online gambling once you’re over 18, and I hope that the verification methods are robust—will actually probably mean that even with those verification methods, children and young people are subjected to what is an addictive form of spending your time, spending your money, and they will see that normalised. There’s information within these regulatory impact statements and there’s information from advocates against problem gambling that show that when it is advertised, it becomes normalised. We know that because of this regime, there will be legitimate advertising taking place in New Zealand.

I think this is a missed opportunity. The Government should have taken a step to reduce gambling harm. They should have taken steps that looked at the health and wellbeing of New Zealanders. They should have taken steps that meant that people were less likely to be subjected to advertising for online gambling than they are now. Unfortunately, this bill does the exact opposite. It brings in far too many licences all at once and it means that advertising is a lot more likely. So it is regretful that we do not have a regulatory regime—which we sorely need in this country—which will truly address gambling harm.

So, with that, I say my personal view on this conscience matter is that I will not be supporting this bill. However, I am on the Governance and Administration Committee and I look forward to hearing submissions if this bill does pass through the House and looking to see if there are improvements that can be made to this bill to better reflect the harm that online gambling does to our communities. So, with that, I cannot commend this bill to the House but I ask those on the other side to treat this seriously, look to their conscience, and if this bill does indeed go through, try and make significant changes to this bill which would actually look to reduce the harm of gambling that we know is so great within New Zealand’s community.

Thank you very much, Mr Speaker. It’s been interesting to listen to the contributions that we’ve had so far. What I do want to say is this bill is about ensuring that we have a regulated online casino gambling market in New Zealand—better than what we currently have, which is completely unregulated; a complete Wild West scenario where anybody can operate an online gambling service here in New Zealand.

What we’re simply saying is there will be 15 licences available. We can regulate it up to—as Todd Stephenson correctly says—15 licences available. We can actually regulate it here in New Zealand so we actually know who the operators are rather than what happens at present where it’s an ad hoc scheme where absolutely anyone can partake in it. I think it will be for the betterment of New Zealand and for all of us to have a greater understanding of what the online casino gambling market looks like. Therefore, I commend it to the House.

Mr Speaker, thank you. There’s a time-honoured tradition in this House that issues like gambling, like alcohol, and like prostitution reform have been treated as conscience issues, and so it is right that in this debate, members are afforded the opportunity to speak to their values and the values of those people that they represent, in an issue as important as this one. I think it shows us where we have gotten to with this coalition Government, that National, speech after speech, has been about whether we accept this regime—which does very little to improve the situation, if not make it worse—or do nothing. That is not what members are called to do in issues of conscience. This is an issue where every member should be thinking about how best to serve those communities that we represent in this House.

I want to talk about how this bill impacts rangatahi and young people, and how the situation will be made worse by this Government regulation, which does not go as far as it should, which does not go as far as the previous Government would have. Have National members asked their Ministers to discuss this? Have there been National caucus meetings about this issue where 15 licences are going to be granted to now Government-sanctioned online gambling that will then legally advertise to young people? Have they asked why it’s 15 and not one or two? Have they asked how this will now impact the young people in their communities they represent?

Well, this is about the young man who I met over the holidays. He’s a mate of the sister of my husband, and he dropped out of university as a promising, young engineering student at 20 years old, addicted to online poker. His friends knew him as a poker star, but that leads you down a course of an addictive and, fundamentally, harmful hobby and pursuit, which the Minister of Internal Affairs says, “Well, if adults choose to do this, then good on them.” But her changes miss all of the kinds of harm reductions that are needed to make sure that more young people like him are not going down this path and, ultimately, giving up the promising careers of the type that he had and the kind of opportunities in life that he had, because they become addicted to what is a fundamentally harmful and much worse situation than going down to the pokies and putting a bet on the horses over a pint of beer with your mates, because it’s in your room, at midnight, online, in a way which does not have any of the harm reduction tools available—but could have.

This Minister could have introduced a bill today—the work has been done—that included reduction of online harm for young people, that included reduction of harms for people in the digital space, that that Government says it prioritises. Why are we considering a social media ban for young people if we don’t believe that there are genuine digital harms to young people that Government is poorly equipped to deal with now, that tech giants are actively advertising to young people in a way that they know will get them hooked—influencers who are out there peddling gambling to 16-, 17-, and 18-year-olds. Now, this bill would allow those 18-year-olds to still continue to be targeted in that exact way, where online harms through gambling, through things like loot boxes, through video games, are completely fine.

This bill misses the point. And it is a conscience issue. It is an issue for every member to look at their community and say, “Is it OK for me to go down to the local markets and know that one in three of the secondary students I talked to have gambled online? Is that OK? Is that the New Zealand I want to live in, and the community that I want to represent?” No, and that’s why I wouldn’t be heckling the member from Māngere who is speaking about the young Pacific people who are most affected by this Government’s failure. This is a bill which does not help them.

We have National members who say, “Read it”. I’ll read it: the Government’s regulatory impact statements—both of them—both point to the fact that the Government has not done this work. That there was not effective understanding of the community perspectives in this. That we have NGOs that are well-resourced to do this work, to engage with community groups, and there was not time to engage with them. That there has not been analysis about how this will impact young people—by the way, a generation of young people who are drinking less, who are engaged in less risky sex, who are doing fewer drugs.

This is a generation of good kids. They are doing their best, and yet they are gambling more. They have all experienced bullying online. They have all experienced online harm. And now the Government says that it’s fine to sanction 15 tech giants to get in their eyeballs, wherever they go online: social media, YouTube, Spotify—you name it. Everything will be pointed towards this destructive path where young people right now are turning away from the careers that they could have had, are getting addicted to something which is no good for them, and are getting into debt on their credit cards and on their parents’ credit cards. Shame on this Government.

Fact: New Zealanders up and down this country are gambling online at the moment. This is why we’ve got a bill before us that regulates the sector and actually reduces the harm. I think this is a good thing. We can get tax from it. It is a formal sector, and I commend this bill to the House. Thank you.

We come to the end of the debate. I have, as I previously indicated, according to the Standing Orders, treated this subject as a conscience issue. In this case, I know there are members who want to cast a personal vote, and I’m prepared to accept that. This is the process we are going to follow. I’m going to put the question, and I’m going to announce the result. At that stage, any member can ask for a personal vote. The question is that the motion be agreed to.

The question is, That the Online Casino Gambling Bill be considered by the Governance and Administration Committee.

Motion agreed to.

Bill referred to the Governance and Administration Committee.

Instruction to Governance and Administration Committee