At his press conference yesterday, John Key argued that casinos are better at ‘harm minimisation’ than the average pokie machine operator. I tend to agree with him on that, which is why I’m disappointed his government haven’t done more to address the significant issue problem gambling is causing in some of our poorest communities.
At this point in proceedings I thought it would be useful to get a few facts about gambling in New Zealand on the table:
- New Zealanders lost $2.034 billion through gambling in 2008 of which $938 million was lost through pokies.
- $5.6 million is gambled every day in New Zealand.
- Pokies (outside casinos) took $889 million in 2009, compared to $107 million in 1991, and have 46% of the gambling market.
- 2.5million is lost every day on pokies – not including casinos.
- There are 19359 non-casino pokie machines (March 2010) in New Zealand. With casino pokies this means there is one machine for every 134 people over 18 years.
- Pokie machines are the most harmful form of gambling as over 78% of problem gamblers use them as their primary mode of gambling.
- Between 10,000 and 60,000 (0.3% and 1.8%) of adults are problem gamblers in New Zealand.
- A 2009 Ministry of Health study shows that pokie machines are concentrated in the most vulnerable communities.
- 54% venues are in decile 8,9 & 10 areas and 56% Maori and 72% Pacific peoples live in these decile areas.
- In decile 9 areas there is 1 pokie machine for every 75 people and in decile 1 areas there is 1 pokie machine per 465 people.
- A study in 2005 found that approximately 35% of foodbank clients were either problem gamblers themselves or were affected by the gambling of others.
Now that John Key has suddenly had a revelation and decided that problem gambling and pokie machines are such a big problem in low socio-economic areas, I look forward to hearing his government’s comprehensive plan to deal with the issue. I won’t be holding my breath though…
Those deciles for deprivation may confuse people who are only familiar with school decile ratings, which are the other way around. Most deprived areas are 10 (on deprivation scale) but lowest socio-economic school catchments are 1.
There is a difference between’ turnover ‘ on gambling machines and money put in that isnt paid out. Its never appealed to me, but most small winnings are gambled back again. While some people will put the money into one machine but then take it out and put it into the next machine.
There should be info on the proportion of money into the machines , the winnings gambled and the the winnings taken out.
As I understand it, the problem with gambling machines is they stimulate addiction and, on balance, the machines are rigged to take more money than they pay out.
The addiction comes from the way they intermittantly provide positive reinforcement for using them, by paying out little bits of money. When I did educational psychology way back, I saw research evidence showing how that kind of reinforcement encourages the selected behaviour and ensures an individual were keep repeating that behaviour.
Chris, why have you and many others ignore Keno and Lotto in your breakdowns?
This to is gambling and takes money out of families budgets. Some could get the perception that this form is OK especially the way that it is marketed as giving back to communities, pity it takes out over 5 times more than it gives back.
http://thestandard.org.nz/the-class-politics-of-lotto/
Being a gamer I’ve come across similar research. Seems that such research is being used to get people to continue to play games (Especially online games such as WoW), watch TV and, of course, in advertising.
Herodotus, I think the reason the pokkies get more attenton is because they are vey addictive, as discussed above. Lotto doesn’t have the same addictive potential. But I agree about the way it takes from communities more than it gives back.
Carol- Agreed there is a huge amount of research/psyology/human behaviour both in how to “encourage” people to stay gambling longer. Casinos plan to distance the player with time, lights flashing,noise etc. they know the longer that someone is in their premises the more they make. It is a factory: input max time = output profits.
Yet Lotto with the emphasis on the Big One & sanitising with the “community aspect” to entice playing and to distance Lotto from the bad side of gambling. Sky tries the same with its advertising of being entertainment and a night out as opposed to what it really is…..gambling.
I would also like to add that the Pokies have a habit of taking from one community and giving to another
http://iansescapevalve.blogspot.com/2010/10/pub-charities-and-in-particular-one.html
This mob was set up by a rugby union to finance their sport, to pay professional sportsmen and administrators.
Another (First Sovereign) has been cautioned for the amount gifted for prize money for horse racing
This crowd are the antithesis of Robin Hood – stealing from the poor to support the rich!
Questions have to be raised about the wisdom of building a conference centre in Auckland given the fact that the price of oil will continue to push up the cost of air travel and the rapidly improving ability of technology to provide effective face to face dialogue. The question has also to be asked what assumptions lie behind the alleged economic benefits. Most of the jobs created will be casual low paid jobs in the hospitality industry.
“I look forward to hearing his government’s comprehensive plan to deal with the issue.”
I thought local councils had jurisdiction over pokies and their proliferation – surely its a good thing that local communities have control rather than Wellington treating them like Indian reservations.
Oh, meant to add, when I was in Aussie there was a big public health clamp down and the right were claiming removing the pokies was ‘Un Australian’
So it IS Australian to throw your money away?
All gambling is is someone trying to rip you off… if watching your hard earned money get wasted doesn’t make you feel sick then theres something wrong with you
Draco stop playing WoW
Government could legislate a sinking lid policy on pokies – a slow decline from existing outlet levels.
More radical would be to require an ID license to gamble, and banning those on benefits from being able to obtain a gambling ID licence. The gambling ID license being a money card that could not be topped up for further gambling when a person was on a benefit.
Problem gamblers could of course simply be denied cards.
Pacific peoples and Maori are the most vulnerable to pokies and the evidence is there for all to see in the lower socio-economic areas.
The introduction of pokies in the burbs and provinces has been nothing short of a disaster. I agree with the Canadian prescription of restricting slot machines to casinos.
The challenge Chris, is for you and the rest of the Labour caucus to show some gumption and introduce law that will obliterate the presence of these insidious and addictive machines from all pubs in New Zealand.
Restrict them and confine them to controlled areas because too much damage has already been done to communities and societies, let alone the cost of monitoring and policing by the DIA.
Ban all pokies from pubs and clubs because they have skewed the way our societies behave and your figures show the damage they do.
This isn’t a political issue for point scoring this is a serious problem as big if not bigger than teenage binge drinking. MOH has figures that bear this out.
“Sky tries the same with its advertising of being entertainment and a night out as opposed to what it really is…..gambling.”
Interestingly when the CEO of SKY was interviewed on Monday on Nat Radio, he mentioned all the things that would be available to people attending the convention centre, but he didnt use the word gambling…
Many people say that there is a big connection between gambling and crime (or corruption) by some of the people involved in organising the gambling. Does anyone know what the evidence is of this? How much of the profits from gambling actually get back to the (or a) grass roots community?
Pacific peoples and Maori are the most vulnerable to pokies and the evidence is there for all to see in the lower socio-economic areas.
@ ehoa
Probably more accurate to say that the poor are the most vulnerable.
Agree with your sentiments though (hard for me to say as I am not a proponent of paternalism).
If smoking can be knocked on the head in pubs, then move the pokies outside. Guarantee you’ll see a dropoff then.
@Carol, try the MOH for their research and Pacific Island Affairs have an expert in Auckland who has done her PhD thesis on this.
@Carol, I think the games trusts have to display what they earn, what they pay out to communities and what they refuse to pay.
Internal Affairs are aware of most of the scams going on (like the one on my link) but are powerless to do very much. The gaming trusts are tight cliques of well connected lawyers and accountants who are only out to look after their own interests. Sounds remarkably like the current government.
@Gregor, the most effective methods for reducing smoking are increasing taxation and preventing the young to seeing it, as this de-normalises smoking, makes it something they do not see. Putting the pokies outside would expose more kids to the pokies and encourage them to indulge.
@ Ian; I agree that de-normalisation is the key (taxation removing advertising etc.)
However, I don’t think it’s realistic to suggest that ‘kids’ meanifully contribute to the problem gambling stats in this country, rather they suffer the collateral damage of poverty (saying that, I don’t have empirical evidence to back this up so feel free to prove me wrong).
Also, I’m not suggesting pokies on the street. More like inside areas (courtyards and the like) of pubs/bars. Make gambling uncomfortable and the incidence will reduce, something the casinos know well.
Thanks, Ian and Ehoa. Yes I’d heard similar stories, Ian.
it’s not kids gamleing at all it’s old people loseing all there saveings that’s realy all i see when im there im allways the youngest there 19 years old , jack pot which never realy ever goes off worst is soverign THE ARE MONEY SCAMERS ,,,lions fountain i think are fair and honest people got to watch soverign
John Key made this point defending the numbers around the proposed convention centre
“”The evidence seems to support that in a casino they’re in a better environment than say, attached to maybe a pub deliberately targeting low-income people.”
Mr Key said SkyCity may well get more pokie machines as part of the deal, but the overall number of machines would still fall.
“Overall we have a sinking lid policy on them, so we’re actually effectively closing down pokie machines in other parts of Auckland and around the country.
“So even if this deal is to go through, the number of pokie machines in New Zealand would actually be falling. They just wouldn’t fall quite as rapidly.””
A recent international conference in gambling in NZ had at least one speaker concur insofar as casinos are better, and easier to control than pokies spread through the community.
For instance a person with a gambling order can serve an order banning themselves from a casino and the casino enforces that. They cannot do that to every pokie host in their region.
So I put it to the Prime Minister that he weigh up the social and economic factors equally. That he proposes that Sky City helps fund the new convention centre (provided auckland actually needs it rather than wants it) and brings in legislation outlawing pokies everywhere except casinos.
THEN the real discussion will begin, where WILL all those sporting teams get their funding from if we hammer the pokies? Isn’t that also at the heart of this reluctance?
perhaps the casinos could pay a levy under my new system, and that levy goes in part to existing organisations…
Sport New Zealand, Creative NZ and so on for distribution or the NZCT.
Under 18 could be raised to Under 20 for casinos with huge fines if Casinos let in under 20′s. Children currently enter pubs with parents and watch the drinking and pokie playing.
Gambling is insidious and largely invisible (unlike drug and alcohol addiction which becomes hard to hide). One thousand construction jobs, and 900 convention jobs (if that’s actual fulltime (and the construction jobs will be temporary by definition) ) is great and I haven’t seen the genuine as opposed to rosy figures for the economic benefits of the convention centre, but the cost of gambling also has to be accounted for (also hard to pin down). Governments are NOT just about crunching the economic numbers or the job numbers but all social numbers.
So, here’s the plan:
Sky City fund the convention centre and get more pokies.
Pokies are made illegal outside casinos (3 year period to reduce to zero)
Levy on casinos (percentage of profit – say 10%) to go to community funding agencies (like NZCT).
Win-Win
Gambling will still exist BUT it is infinitely easier to control gambling through casinos than through pubs.
“Hone Harariwa decided to speak out against poker machines. The Mana leader stated that the devices caused turmoil in low income areas across New Zealand and called for them to be removed. Recently, New Zealand’s Problem Gambling Foundation announced that they back Harawira’s initiative.
Harawira stated that many of the residents of low income areas would choose to remove poker machines from local venues if they had the chance. Given that problem gambling rates are much higher in areas affected by poverty, it seems like viable solution.
The New Zealand Problem Gambling Foundation released a statement this week announcing its support. As the availability of poker machines in low income residential areas is seen as a cause of problem gambling, the foundation sees this as a worthy cause to support.”