by Kevin Hague
It’s ironic that on a day that is supposed to be about not gambling Sky City choses to eschew all responsibility for problem gambling. Their release this morning, entitled “The issue isn’t gambling, it’s PROBLEM gambling” (note the capitalisation of PROBLEM) is a slap in the face to all the people who have gone through or are going through this terrible addiction, their families, their friends and ultimately society who often picks up the tab.
They’re quick to play up the individual responsibility of people with gambling problems but we know that this does not work when it comes to addiction to gambling.
Gambling is a problem that we need to stamp on. As we’ve seen this week with South Canterbury Finance taking the long bet can get you into a lot of trouble.
While it is okay to have the odd flutter you just have to look at the massive amount of money—$2 billion on gambling each year, $5.5 million every day—that is being sucked out of the economy that could be going to providing the essentials for all kiwis.
Also the Government’s recent proposals on alcohol law reform leave open a gaping loophole which will allow for casinos to stay open and serving alcohol 24 hours a day. So once pubs close it makes it that more appealing to head down to the casino in Auckland and Christchurch.
It may also have the perverse end of encouraging more casino applications because they can be exempted from the normal liquor licensing laws on opening hours.
It was good to see earlier in the year that Christchurch City Council retained their sinking lid policy on pokie machines and declined an application by the trotting club to install machines.
So head along to one of the events that are being held around the country and support gamblefree day.
Published in Society & Culture by Kevin Hague on Wed, September 1st, 2010
Tags: alcohol, casinos, christchurch, costs, gambling, Kevin Hague
More posts by Kevin Hague | more about Kevin Hague
on the trolls and those who are unable to keep on topic
Where is the money going if not the economy?
Like or Dislike:
5 
2 (+3)
“While it is okay to have the odd flutter…”
Phew, that’s a relief. I wouldn’t want to think I was gambling without the approval of the Green Party.
Like or Dislike:
5 
3 (+2)
My question is where is the money coming from that people gamble away? If it is coming from those whose main source of income is welfare, then surely the government would need to start sorting out that problem?
Like or Dislike:
4 
2 (+2)
Gambling is an unproductive industry. It preys on the weak, captures them with addiction, and takes their money – all for the slim chance of a big win that is always one more bet away.
It provides minimal jobs, creates no wealth, no skills, no export earnings, no retail sales. One third of the money that is sunk into gambling in NZ goes into the pockets of overseas owners of casinos. A third supposedly goes into the community, but why not cut out the middle man and hand over the money straight to the community without causing all the social harm?
Also gambling venues tend to cluster around lower socio-economic areas. Thus taking from the poor and giving to the rich.
Gambling in no way makes our economy resiliant or makes society better.
“Phew, that’s a relief. I wouldn’t want to think I was gambling without the approval of the Green Party.”
Pretty sure that’s not what KH meant, Daedalus.
Like or Dislike:
10 
3 (+7)
BTW.. the flutterers for fun may also be calculated.. aka if you aint in you can’t win.. not that I’m saying this for sting ops like slot machines and house-controlled tables/wheels.. but there is a firm economic point called velocity dynamics involved in most – I suspect all – monetarist economic regimes..
so yes, abuse may be rife yet greater harm is likely and fun-taking along with risk realisations the more harmed by withdrawing or severely constraining what works..
have-nots would be a proud boast for former problem gamblers to uphold..
Like or Dislike:
3 
0 (+3)
Oops..
I tried ‘click to edit’ so as to add how about the HAVENOT badge (award)..? sadly it did not respond quickly enough .. so I’m doing it this add-on way..
Like or Dislike:
1 
0 (+1)
You’re never going to stop gambling, look at the US, the have set up gambling areas in places like Atlantic City, Las Vegas and Indian Reservations and yet book makers in other areas still abound, bringing average people into contact with organised crime that they would otherwise have no contact with…
So as I see it you can have money going to corporations who have to pay taxes and give some back to the community or to organised criminals who do neither…
Like or Dislike:
2 
2 (0)
The gambling industry is like a drug dealer, in your community. It makes money, its participants are willing, but it takes no responsibility for the harm is causes communities.
The only difference is that its legal.
Lets not touch upon the animal cruelty factors in the racing industries JUST YET.
Like or Dislike:
2 
3 (-1)
Raptor asks:
Because it wouldn’t.
Organisations I belong to (and countless others) are most grateful to the gamblers and to the trusts that make gambling possible, as that gambling provides funding for community projects that otherwise would receive no funding whatsoever. There is no “supposedly” about it.
You can dream about cutting out the middleman, but how would that work in practice? Would you have that section of the population who now gamble would required to just give the money they currently gamble to community collectors? Yeah, right.
Attitudes like that of the Christchurch Council (and by this frogblog topic, presumably the Green Party) are starving community projects of the funding they need.
Like or Dislike:
1 
4 (-3)
@ dBuckley,
So your projects are more important than the wellbeing of at risk communities?
Let me share a quick something I found. The gambling industry has been refinancing itself through pokie machines, channeling pokie money back into the greyhound racing industry, by this much:
2005: $ 367,142.69
2006: $ 583,052.27
2007: $ 860,641.13
2008: $ 639,202.00
2009: $ 179,680.75
Source: pgfnz.org.nz
Im glad you think that its so important for the gambling industry to refinance itself that its importance outweighs the cost imposed upon society. Racing dogs to death is sooo much more important.
Like or Dislike:
3 
1 (+2)
AaronC – I assume when you say “your projects” you mean “our projects” – our community projects. Or are you not part of a community? The things I happen to be involved with are in no way special or exceptional, they are just a few of thousands.
Let me be unambiguously clear: I think our community projects are important. To borrow your term, this funding is essential to the wellbeing of these communities.
There is, as it stands, no reasonable probability of alternative funding.
If the anti-gamblers were to achieve their aims tomorrow, and gambling was “gone by lunchtime”, where would that leave thousands of community projects? John isn’t going to put his hand in his hand into the till and start scattering the folding stuff. It would be the end.
We live in a world of evils, and thus there is the need to balance them; I accept the gambling impact for the ultimate good work that it does. Its not good, but in the big picture the overall outcome is good. The lessor of competing evils.
Now, as to the stuff from the pgfnz.org.nz website – what point are you trying to make? Even the biggest year is a small fraction of one trust’s funding to the community for one quarter, and there are several trusts and several quarters to the year. A drop in the ocean of good causes.
Like or Dislike:
1 
2 (-1)
You endorse the same logic as John Keys Tax cuts:
I will reduce taxes
//he reduces taxes, hikes GST
End result- we are better off
Your version: (And do please define your cause)
Take money off people- many of whom suffer gambling addiction
Give the govt coffers a chunk (So they can buy giant pandas, finance South Korean ship sinking investigations and other wholesome investments)
Give the offshore casino owners a bigger chunk
Give whats left back to the community, and you can split it with the likes of the greyhound racing community- another arm of the gambling industry..
Can you not see the flaw of your logic? If you rob Peter $10 and pay Paul $1, its not enough to say “Hey Paul made $1!”
Do share the nature of your charity-if its anything like the greyhound racing industry, it is wholly immoral, and should not be taking advantage of this farcical loophole.
If you are receiving funds from immoral sources, then that is the issue. You need to either seek sustainable ethical funding, or simply get real about your grandiose community schemes that the community cannot afford.
I look forward to hearing about what your funding goes towards.
Like or Dislike:
2 
2 (0)
edit to my comment above-”we are WORSE off”
Like or Dislike:
0 
1 (-1)
AaronC – all those immoral causes gambling money goes to are terrible – aren’t they?
Like those damned immoral rescue helicopters – all they do is take money from pokies and fly around the country corrupting people.
And our local immoral kindy. The kids should harden up and freeze in the winter instead of getting a grant to buy a heating system.
As for the kids in the junior soccer club. Can’t they play without soccer balls?
And I’m sure St Johns could do without ambulances – they should take taxis instead.
And if you go to the beach and can’t swim you should expect to drown – instead of being saved by those immoral surf lifesavers.
And why can’t the coastguard rescue people in a row boat instead of having a dedicated rescue craft.
And teenagers should get their act together instead of neeeding a service like youthline with it’s immoral funding.
And do we really need a neonatal unit in South Auckland to save premature babies.
Or hospices to help terminal patients.
And volunteer fire brigades should be able to fight fires in their pyjamas – why do they need protective clothing?
Like or Dislike:
2 
6 (-4)
Well health services and emergency responses are partially why we pay taxes.
So kids soccer costs money. Hmm reality, ouch.
Maybe you could sell drugs to put boots on their feet since morality in the sourcing of moneys not an issue?
It doesn’t matter how good your cause, if your moneys dirty, your moneys dirty. Its not cool to inflict harm upon one sector of society, in order to finance another. If you say its choice to gamble or not, the same could be argued about the illicit drug industry. Now if drug dealers ran a scheme similar, would that justify their trade?
Like or Dislike:
1 
1 (0)
First lets separate casinos from pokies in pubs and places – they operate in two different universes. Gambling machine trusts are entirely NZ operated, and are themselves non-profit trusts. There are no fat cats or profits going overseas. Casinos, on the other hand, are commercial organisations, and can have fat cats (although I’ve met a casino CEO, and he’s an ordinary chap) and overseas owners as they please. Casinos also fund community activities, though (as I understand it) they deal with bigger things than most local community groups.
Pick any gaming machine trust on the web. Download their reports.
Here’s the first few lines from TTCF’s april – september 2007 report, picked as it was the first one they list:
This goes on for 40 pages to the tune of nearly $10m. Just one trust (albeit a big one) in one quarter. That’s an awful lot of good causes.
Ok, there are things in there I would rather not be there: It think its wrong that the trusts should be allowed to invest in horse racing stakes, but, that’s a minor but annoying detail in the overall scheme of things.
Although I’m not sharing in what way organisations I work with benefit from trust funding, but it is nothing to do with racing, or anything even vaguely immoral. They are just like the examples I listed above; community organisations, doing things in the community for the community.
There is no John Key logic, not Peter / Paul story here – analogies are not required or even helpful, it is exactly what it is – people choose to play pokies, and a chunk of that goes to good causes in our communities.
Like or Dislike:
2 
2 (0)
And to those who are red ‘x’ing my posts – you may not like the way that gambling funds community projects today; I’d be interested in hearing your alternatives. Or that you think that funding community projects is a bad idea overall.
(Frankly, I don’t like this arrangement either – I’d rather it wasn’t that way, but we are where we are)
Like or Dislike:
3 
2 (+1)
So we have
Community Sports: Should be paid for by participants.
Public Healthcare and Education: Should be paid by taxes.
and general dodgy business, like gambling industry refinancing itself, as I outlined above.
So lets just pretend gambling was illegal for arguments sake, that money would in turn be circulated in general trade, therefore generating taxes, which can therefore be used to fund the healthcare and education sectors.
Illegal gambling would be its own kettle of fish-people are expected to obey the law.
People with addictions being given a place to succumb to that addiction isnt justified by joe smiths kids playing subsidised soccer.
Obviously gambling is NOT going to be banned, but we could certainly look at sorting out the issues, like the refinancing scam I outlined above, and in all decency wiping out the greyhound racing industry altogether. It kills hundreds of dogs per year in grueling injuries.
If we’re going to tidy things up, greyhound racing can be the first to go, and so can their refinancing through pokie machines.
Like or Dislike:
1 
1 (0)
Aaron – I was just making the point that the money generally goes to good causes, that (like you say) should be funded in other ways.
In reality they never will be.
Our local junior soccer club relies on these grants from most of it’s running costs. If parents had to pay fees that covered everything then I doubt we would have any club members.
And kids in sport has huge benefits down the line. Apart from the health and social benefits, just look at any youth court and you’d find that those there simply don’t pay any sport.
Stats from one youth court in Aus show less than 1% played regular sport.
Personally, I don’t think it would be a bad idea to put all the pokies in a crusher, and add a few cents to alcohol to be put into a fund for communuity funding.
Like or Dislike:
4 
2 (+2)
The questions are basically: (1) do you accept money from the devil in order to do good things? and (2) what strings are attached to the money on offer from the devil?
Like or Dislike:
2 
0 (+2)
I fail to see the difference here between spending money on gambling and spending money on buying another pair of shoes or any other form of consumption. If a poor person lets their kid starve because they go gambling or because they buy a new play-station game console what is the difference. If they are on welfare then maybe we should force the use of restricted welfare debit cards to limit what they can and can’t buy. To be on welfare means you must be a child and so I guess the state needs to treat you like a child.
Of course the greens are always the first to leap up and down whenever someone attacks the helpless poor, its always the mean evil corporations that come into people’s homes with guns and force people to consume.
All we need to do is hand over power and more importantly responsibility to the almighty ones in the green party and then these Fabian socialists will engineer us a Utopian society where everyone will live in happiness worshiping at the feet of their god king Kevin Hague.
Of course what the Fabians in the green party don’t realize is that their Utopian society will require enormous controls and force since what they are proposing is almost the exact opposite of human nature.
All life preys on other life forms it is how we survive. The idea that you can remove this from humanity leaves you with something that is no longer human as you would soon discover in your green Utopian world which would now be inhabited by mindless zombies.
Like or Dislike:
1 
3 (-2)
To point out that there is a terrible problem with gambling (mostly on machines in pubs) is not to say ban them entirely. There are things we can do to help ameliorate the problem without having to outlaw gambling.
As things stand machines are designed to use every psychological trick in the book to get gamblers to stay in front feeding in money. (I personally know three people who have had problems with addiction to pokies. One was ruined entirely). We should use some psychology to help.
What goes in to a machine and what comes out should be separate. Feed in money and get out tokens you need to take to the bar to redeem.
Do not let people smoke cigarettes at a machine.
Ensure that there are plenty of clocks visible from every machine.
The idea is to get people moving and break the routine that the psychologists designing the machines work so hard to establish.
I do not think it makes sense to ban the pokies outright. But to create an environment where it is less comfortable to while away the time, zombie like, feeding in money would probably make them die a natural death. People will still gamble, always have always will, but shame on us for allowing an industry to build up that offers so little in return for fleecing the gamblers.
Lastly I take AaronC’s points. But shame on us (all of us) for putting AaronC in the position that the only way to keep doing this work is to take tainted money. It is an indictment on our community. Depressing really.
peace
W
Like or Dislike:
3 
0 (+3)
Still no reasonable alternatives to pokie machine funding suggested, and all we are learning is that some people hate junior soccer clubs and other such things that rely on pokie funding.
Disappointing.
Like or Dislike:
1 
2 (-1)
And I’ve just re-read Kevin’s original piece
Given that well less than the entire population gambles, and that Kevin reckons that “[this money could] be going to providing the essentials for all kiwis” then clearly Kevin must have a plan to take the money that those that do gamble today gamble with, and redistributing it somehow.
I’d really like to know how that would work.
Like or Dislike:
1 
1 (0)
dbuckley, just because something causing harm is the status quo, is not a good enough reason or it to continue in perpetuity. The reality is, if you want society to pay for your sons soccer boots, then you will not get support.
As a male with no children, I already pay for other peoples children to have education, dental and healthcare. I pay for people with unhealthy lifestyles to get medical treatment in hospitals. We as a society pay the price of problem gambling.
Its time you took responsibility for your costs and stopped seeking to take that money off others, using a system of filtration that would give any plumber nightmares.
@Turnip28:
“To be on welfare means you must be a child and so I guess the state needs to treat you like a child. ”
I think this clearly demonstrates your lack of understanding of the issue of welfare. Do us a favor, and google “recession” for a start, and maybe something like “jobs lost in the recession” or even “number of people with degrees who are unemployed.”
Like or Dislike:
1 
1 (0)
I believe the word you are looking for dbuckley is either socialism or communism that’s how Kevin plans to “Redistribute” his wealth.
Like or Dislike:
1 
3 (-2)
I try to avoid words like that, which are politically very overt, but yes, the only realistic alternative is some sort of central taxation and distribution system.
Frankly, I (currently) prefer the existing system, which is not a general tax based system, and the funding constraints are set by the willingness of people to gamble, rather than a political directive.
Like or Dislike:
0 
2 (-2)
If people want to gamble and others want to facilitate the experience then leave them to it….and stop bothering the rest of us to pick up the pieces.
I think this clearly demonstrates your lack of understanding of the issue of welfare. Do us a favor, and google “recession” for a start, and maybe something like “jobs lost in the recession” or even “number of people with degrees who are unemployed.
How about you google the “real causes of recessions and the role state intervention plays in them” and then consider the striking similarities between that and coercive state welfare that snares and traps people onto dependancy while others are enslaved to fund them…mmmm?
Maybe if the state wasn’t so big and intrusive into peoples lives we would not have these problems in the first place huh?
Like or Dislike:
1 
4 (-3)
James, wake up. The recession is a reality. You cannot turn back time.
So everybody, shall we agree to license methamphetamine retailers in our suburbs on the condition that they pay a levy? Like pokies?
Theres nothing wrong with selling P, if it contributes money to public bowls bridge and soccer groups, right?
Why James will be excited, after all a legal P trade will create jobs!
The reality is James, that during this recession, those on 6 figure incomes regularly paid themselves more, while the poorest struggled harder.
Just keep votin’ blue mate.
Like or Dislike:
0 
1 (-1)
gambling is a vice.
It takes money from communitys.
The way pokies money is distributed is a bloody scandle with more winks and nods and scams going on than you’d get in a room full of national party politicians.
Every town has seen its pub owners prosecuted for fraudulant dishing out of pokie money and let me tell you that the frauds are still going on …….. its handy if you know a pub owner with pokies.
The drug booze and the vice gambling makes a lot of money for a few greedy exploitive people.
Expect the Natioanl party to look after and protect these drug and vice pushers.
Like or Dislike:
1 
1 (0)
nznative:
Examples please?
I ask because pub owners dont get to “dish out pokie money”, fraudulently or otherwise.
Like or Dislike:
1 
0 (+1)
Arron C: James, wake up. The recession is a reality. You cannot turn back time.
So everybody, shall we agree to license methamphetamine retailers in our suburbs on the condition that they pay a levy? Like pokies?
Theres nothing wrong with selling P, if it contributes money to public bowls bridge and soccer groups, right?
Why James will be excited, after all a legal P trade will create jobs!
Wow…you are one out of touch dude huh? I guess the failure of prohibition and the war on drugs in general just goes over your head eh numpty.If P was able to be legally sold the negative consequences would drop to nothing…its the illegality of P that causes the associated crime issues…do learn something please.
As to the recession…I know we can’t turn back time..mores the pity!But we can learn not to keep making the same mistakes time after time..which is what big state subsidies and bailouts are.
The reality is James, that during this recession, those on 6 figure incomes regularly paid themselves more, while the poorest struggled harder.
Thanks big government interferance….you’ve done it again!
Just keep votin’ blue mate.
Never have.But I used to vote Red….and even Green once.
Like or Dislike:
1 
1 (0)