Jack Tame: Gambling reforms miss the biggest problem with pokies

The Government’s announced a review of pokies and the Gambling Act, alongside some pokie reforms that’ll come into force next year. But the reforms are much weaker than what was initially proposed. For the time being, there will be no cuts to pokie jackpots, no ban on free rolls, and softer penalties for pub owners who don’t follow the rules compared to what was proposed. Instead, the changes that have been confirmed concern where pokies and ATMs can be positioned in a pub, and rules around how pub owners should check for and treat problem gamblers. It’s not nothing, but it’s also not a profound change.

Some problem gambler advocates have expressed disappointment, but I must admit to being a bit surprised to read comments from the chairman of the Gaming Machine Association. Peter Dengate-Thrush told Stuff that even his organisation felt the changes didn’t go far enough, the minister had missed an opportunity, and facial recognition software to identify problem gamblers should be introduced across New Zealand.

For me though, there’s a fundamental problem with pokie machines in New Zealand that still needs to be addressed. And so far, almost no one wants to touch it.

Under our law, a minimum of 40 per cent of pokie proceeds have to be returned to the community as charitable grants. We’re always reminded when a sports club or a dance group has been supported by a grant from a charitable gaming trust. Many people don’t give it much thought – a charitable grant sounds great!

But I see it differently. The ends don’t justify the means. The community funding structure is a very clever way to excuse, normalise and even subtly promote hugely damaging, antisocial behaviour.

Can’t we find a better way to fund community organisations? A way that doesn’t mean our sports clubs and hobby groups are relying on New Zealanders pouring their money into pokie machines in order to survive? Money doesn’t grow on trees but we’re robbing Peter to pay Paul.

What’s the point in supporting one community with a charitable grant if you have to damage another community in order to get the money in the first place?

These government reforms are a start but if you really want to smash the problem, follow the money. The whole structure has to change.