Parliament bill

Online Casino Gambling Bill

Royal assent

Last checked
July 15, 2026 15:53
Source captured
July 15, 2026 15:53
Source
View on Parliament.nz

What this bill does

The bill passed its third reading 68–54; the vote was not unanimous. Online casino gambling is already widely accessible to people in New Zealand but, according to the Minister, is currently unregulated and offers no recourse when things go wrong. The bill aims to create a licensing regime, reduce gambling harm, protect consumers, and ensure online casino gambling benefits communities. The bill allows licensed operators to offer and advertise online casino gambling to people in New Zealand, while prohibiting unlicensed providers. Licensees must meet consumer-protection and harm-minimisation duties, including age checks, excluding problem gamblers, and not providing gambling credit.

AI-assisted summary based on the bill text and linked Hansard debates.

Latest voting result

April 22, 2026
Third reading: Passed Party vote

Ayes 68 · Noes 54

  • National Party Aye · 49 votes
  • ACT Party Aye · 11 votes
  • NZ First Party Aye · 8 votes
  • Labour Party No · 34 votes
  • Green Party No · 14 votes
  • Te Pāti Māori No · 5 votes
  • Ferris, Tākuta No

View the vote in Hansard

Arguments raised in Parliament

AI-assisted summary of the linked Hansard debates. Each point is grounded in the cited transcript.

Arguments for

Licensed online-casino operators would have to identify and assist people experiencing harm, exclude problem gamblers, and refuse gambling credit, which the Minister argues will make gambling safer for people who choose to participate.

The bill makes offshore operators subject to New Zealand law and equips the regulator with enforcement tools, so offshore location should no longer shield operators from compliance consequences.

Controlled advertising would help consumers distinguish licensed providers and redirect demand away from unlicensed operators, rather than simply promoting gambling participation.

Online-gambling duty would be returned through the Lottery Grants Board, providing community groups and sports clubs with funding from gambling that is already occurring.

Arguments against

Creating a competitive licensed market of up to 15 operators would expand online gambling and its advertising exposure, increasing harm to vulnerable people rather than merely controlling existing activity.

Because the bill leaves most harm-prevention detail to later regulations, Parliament does not set sufficiently firm safeguards for operators, potentially weakening protection for people at risk of gambling harm.

Online casino gambling is continuous, easily concealed, and accessible on personal devices, so it is claimed to heighten addiction and make harm harder for families and regulators to detect.

Nuance and qualifications

Community and sporting organisations may depend on gambling proceeds to survive, but opponents argue that this funding mechanism makes their viability dependent on harm experienced in the community.

Bill text

Online Casino Gambling Bill

Version published March 26, 2026 00:00.

Online Casino Gambling Bill The Parliament of New Zealand enacts as follows: 1 Title This Act is the Online Casino Gambling Act 2025 . 2 Commencement This Act comes into force on 1 May 2026 . However,— a sections 66 and 67 come into force on 1 December 2026 ; and b sections 80A to 80F , and the amendments in Schedule 2 to subpart 3 of Part 3 of the Gambling Act 2003, come into force on 1 January 2027 . 3 Purpose The purpose of this Act is to— a establish a licensing regime for online casino gambling; and b prohibit the conduct and advertisement of unlicensed online casino gambling; and c prevent and minimise harm from online casino gambling; and d protect consumers who participate in online casino gambling; and e ensure that money from online casino gambling benefits the community. 4 Territorial application The prohibitions in sections 9(1) and 10(1) apply to a person regardless of whether the person is in or outside New Zealand. Provisions under this Act that apply to a person who takes part in the licensing process apply to that person regardless of whether the person is in or outside New Zealand. Provisions under this Act that apply to a person who conducts online casino gambli…
Read full bill text
Online Casino Gambling Bill The Parliament of New Zealand enacts as follows: 1 Title This Act is the Online Casino Gambling Act 2025 . 2 Commencement This Act comes into force on 1 May 2026 . However,— a sections 66 and 67 come into force on 1 December 2026 ; and b sections 80A to 80F , and the amendments in Schedule 2 to subpart 3 of Part 3 of the Gambling Act 2003, come into force on 1 January 2027 . 3 Purpose The purpose of this Act is to— a establish a licensing regime for online casino gambling; and b prohibit the conduct and advertisement of unlicensed online casino gambling; and c prevent and minimise harm from online casino gambling; and d protect consumers who participate in online casino gambling; and e ensure that money from online casino gambling benefits the community. 4 Territorial application The prohibitions in sections 9(1) and 10(1) apply to a person regardless of whether the person is in or outside New Zealand. Provisions under this Act that apply to a person who takes part in the licensing process apply to that person regardless of whether the person is in or outside New Zealand. Provisions under this Act that apply to a person who conducts online casino gambling apply to that person— a regardless of whether the person is in or outside New Zealand; but b only to the extent that the gambling is conducted in a manner that enables a person who is in New Zealand to participate in the gambling. Provisions under this Act that apply to a person who publishes or arranges to publish an advertisement relating to online casino gambling apply to that person— a regardless of whether the person is in or outside New Zealand; but b only to the extent that the advertisement is published in a manner that enables it to be brought to the attention of a person who is in New Zealand. The offence in section 66 applies to a person who engages in the conduct described in that section— a regardless of whether the person is in or outside New Zealand; and b regardless of whether the person engages in any of the conduct in or outside New Zealand. A requirement to provide information under section 71 applies to a person regardless of whether the person is in or outside New Zealand. 5 Interpretation In this Act, unless the context otherwise requires,— advertisement , in relation to online casino gambling,— a means any words, whether written, printed, or spoken (including on film, video recording, or other medium, or broadcast or telecast), any pictorial representation, design, or device (including endorsements, sponsorships, and similar third-party arrangements), and any other communication used to— i encourage participation in online casino gambling; or ii notify the availability of online casino gambling; or iii promote a gambling platform; but b does not include— i any health message concerning gambling that does not directly or indirectly promote online casino gambling or a gambling platform: ii any communication used to promote technical equipment or software intended for distribution only to operators: iii any communication by or on behalf of the Secretary in relation to online casino gambling: iv any communication between an operator and a customer that is exclusively for administrative purposes: v any communication described in paragraph (a) that is made in the course of broadcasting a physical sporting event that is held outside New Zealand advertising and marketing strategy means a document that— a sets out an operator’s strategy for advertising and marketing online casino gambling and the operator’s gambling platform in New Zealand, including— i the operator’s overall marketing objectives and intentions; and ii the operator’s proposed— A marketing methods and techniques; and B branding (for example, slogans and logo design); and iii the operator’s strategy with regards to— A the frequency, volume, and type of advertisements; and B the channels and media through which advertisements will be made; and C the classes of consumers at which the advertisements will be targeted; and D the use of any endorsements, sponsorships, or similar third-party arrangements; and iv any market research or data that the operator has relied on to support its advertising and marketing decisions; and b sets out how the operator will comply with regulations made under section 77 Advertising Standards Authority means the Advertising Standards Authority Incorporated (including the Advertising Standards Complaints Board and the Advertising Standards Complaints Appeal Board that are appointed by the Advertising Standards Authority Incorporated) civil liability act has the same meaning as in section 50 class 3 operator’s licence and class 4 operator’s licence have the same meanings as in section 4(1) of the Gambling Act 2003 communication device means a machine, device, or thing for communicating at a distance and using any technology (including internet communication, telecommunication, radio communication, and broadcasting technology) community purposes has the same meaning as in section 277 of the Gambling Act 2003 compliance strategy means a document that sets out an operator’s strategies, plans, policies, systems, and processes (to the extent not already addressed in another strategy) to comply with— a this Act; and b the Gambling Act 2003; and c the Anti-Money Laundering and Countering Financing of Terrorism Act 2009; and d the Privacy Act 2020; and e any secondary legislation made under an Act specified in paragraphs (a) to (d) computer-simulated sporting event means any sport, game, competition, race, or other similar event that is simulated by a computer and does not involve human or animal competitors conduct , in relation to online casino gambling,— a includes any of the following activities: i organising, managing, or supervising online casino gambling: ii operating a gambling platform through which gamblers can participate in online casino gambling: iii distributing the turnover of online casino gambling (for example, by paying prizes or meeting costs): iv assisting in any activity described in subparagraphs (i) to (iii) ; but b does not include participating in online casino gambling as a gambler consumer protection strategy means a document that sets out an operator’s strategies, plans, policies, systems, and processes to— a verify the age and identity of consumers; and b ensure that the interests of consumers are protected; and c ensure that consumers are treated fairly; and d comply with regulations made under section 76 draw has the same meaning as in section 4(1) of the Gambling Act 2003 expression of interest means an expression of interest to apply for a licence under section 13 gambling — a means betting, paying, or staking consideration, directly or indirectly, on the outcome of something seeking to win money when the outcome depends wholly or partly on chance; but b does not include— i a sales promotion scheme (as defined in section 4(1) of the Gambling Act 2003): ii bookmaking (as defined in section 4(1) of the Gambling Act 2003): iii betting, paying, or staking consideration on the outcome of a physical sporting event (whether or not held in New Zealand and whether or not authorised under the Racing Industry Act 2020): iv betting, paying, or staking consideration on the outcome of a novelty event: v an act, behaviour, or transaction that is declared not to be gambling for the purposes of the Gambling Act 2003 by regulations made under section 368 of that Act gambling platform means 1 or more of the following through which a person conducts online casino gambling: a an application: b an internet site: c another electronic medium harm has the same meaning as in section 4(1) of the Gambling Act 2003 harm prevention and minimisation strategy means a document that sets out an operator’s strategies, plans, policies, systems, and processes to— a prevent and minimise harm from online casino gambling; and b comply with regulations made under section 75 key officer , in relation to a person, means— a the chief executive of the person; and b the chief financial officer of the person; and c the chief operating officer of the person; and d a person performing functions equivalent to those of any of the persons mentioned in paragraphs (a) to (c) ; and e any other person who has a significant level of influence over the decision making, management, or finances of the person licence means a licence granted under this Act licensing process has the same meaning as in section 11(1) Lotteries Commission has the same meaning as in section 4(1) of the Gambling Act 2003 New Zealand lottery has the same meaning as in section 4(1) of the Gambling Act 2003 novelty event means any cultural, social, political, environmental, economic, or other similar event, whether it takes place in or outside New Zealand online casino gambling — a means gambling at a distance by interaction through a communication device, including using the communication device— i to participate in gambling that relies on a random number generator or other wholly or partly chance-based outcome generation (such as slot machines or lotteries); or ii to participate in casino table gambling (such as blackjack, poker, or baccarat); or iii to bet, pay, or stake consideration on the outcome of a computer-simulated sporting event; but b does not include— i class 3 gambling in the form of a lottery conducted by any gambling operator that holds a class 3 operator’s licence that allows the gambling operator to conduct a lottery (as those terms are defined in section 4(1) of the Gambling Act 2003): ii gambling that is declared not to be online casino gambling by regulations made under section 79(1)(a) online casino gambling technology — a means any software, hardware, firmware, or other technology used for the purposes of conducting or advertising online casino gambling; but b does not include anything that is declared not to be online casino gambling technology by regulations made under section 79(1)(b) operator means a person who holds a licence to conduct online casino gambling overseas regulator means a person or body in a country other than New Zealand that performs functions that correspond with, or are similar to, any of those conferred on the Secretary under this Act personal information has the same meaning as in section 7(1) of the Privacy Act 2020 physical sporting event — a means any sport, game, competition, race, or other similar event that involves human or animal competitors; and b includes any electronic game involving human competitors problem gambler has the same meaning as in section 4(1) of the Gambling Act 2003 protected New Zealand lottery means standard lotto, lotto powerball, or lotto strike (as those terms are defined in rules made under section 243 of the Gambling Act 2003) publish means— a insert in any newspaper or other periodical publication printed, published, or distributed; or b send to any person by any means; or c deliver to a person or leave at a place owned or occupied by a person; or d broadcast; or e include in any film or video; or f include in any disk for use with a computer; or g convey by electronic medium; or h distribute by any means; or i display by way of a sign, notice, poster, or other means; or j store electronically in a way that it is accessible to the public; or k bring to the notice of the public in any other manner registration audio mark means a distinctive sound that is publicly notified by the Secretary for the purposes of section 41(2) to indicate that a person is licensed to conduct online casino gambling registration icon means a picture or symbol that is publicly notified by the Secretary for the purposes of section 41(1) to indicate that a person is licensed to conduct online casino gambling regulations means regulations made under this Act relevant legislation means— a this Act: b the Anti-Money Laundering and Countering Financing of Terrorism Act 2009: c the Companies Act 1993: d the Consumer Guarantees Act 1993: e the Corporations (Investigation and Management) Act 1989: f the Crimes Act 1961: g the Fair Trading Act 1986: h the Gambling Act 2003: i the Gaming Duties Act 1971: j the Goods and Services Tax Act 1985: k the Insolvency Act 2006: l the Privacy Act 2020: m the Tax Administration Act 1994: n the Unsolicited Electronic Messages Act 2007: o any secondary legislation made under an Act specified in paragraphs (a) to (n) : p any overseas legislation equivalent to legislation specified in paragraphs (a) to (o) : q any legislation publicly notified by the Secretary for the purposes of this paragraph relevant offence means an offence under relevant legislation Secretary means the Secretary for Internal Affairs security has the same meaning as in section 6(1) of the Overseas Investment Act 2005 significant influence , in relation to a licence, has the same meaning as in section 19(4) take-down notice means a notice issued under section 56 turnover means the aggregate stakes in an online casino gambling activity. 6 Transitional, savings, and related provisions The transitional, savings, and related provisions set out in Schedule 1 have effect according to their terms. 7 Act binds the Crown This Act binds the Crown. 8 Functions of Secretary The functions of the Secretary under this Act are— a to administer the licensing regime under this Act: b to investigate breaches or suspected breaches of this Act: c to monitor and enforce compliance with this Act: d to investigate complaints against operators and other persons in relation to online casino gambling: e to maintain a public register with details of operators and licences: f to prescribe minimum standards in relation to online casino gambling technology: g to approve forms for the purposes of this Act: h to perform any other functions set out in this Act. 9 Prohibition on conducting online casino gambling without licence A person may conduct online casino gambling in a manner that enables a person who is in New Zealand to participate in the gambling only if— a the person conducts the online casino gambling in accordance with a licence; and b the online casino gambling is not substantially similar to, and is not likely to be in competition with, a protected New Zealand lottery; and c the online casino gambling does not involve betting on the outcome of a protected New Zealand lottery. Nothing in this section applies to the Lotteries Commission to the extent that it conducts New Zealand lotteries. 10 Prohibition on advertising online casino gambling without licence A person may publish or arrange to publish an advertisement relating to online casino gambling in a manner that enables the advertisement to be brought to the attention of a person who is in New Zealand only if— a the person publishes or arranges to publish the advertisement in accordance with a licence; and b the advertisement does not relate to online casino gambling that is substantially similar to, and is likely to be in competition with, a protected New Zealand lottery; and c the advertisement does not relate to online casino gambling that involves betting on the outcome of a protected New Zealand lottery. Nothing in this section applies to the Lotteries Commission to the extent that it publishes or arranges to publish advertisements in relation to New Zealand lotteries. 11 Overview of subpart This subpart sets out the process to obtain a licence to conduct online casino gambling in New Zealand (the licensing process ). The licensing process consists of 3 stages that are set out in this subpart as follows: a sections 12 to 15 set out the first stage and contain provisions— i enabling the Secretary to invite expressions of interest for a licence by giving public notice; and ii requiring interested persons to submit expressions of interest with specified details relating to themselves, their key officers, and their compliance history; and iii setting out criteria for the Secretary to accept an expression of interest: b section 16 sets out the second stage and requires the Secretary to invite persons whose expressions of interest have been accepted to participate in a competitive process to determine— i who may apply for the licence; and ii the amount payable for the licence: c sections 17 to 21 set out the third stage and contain provisions— i requiring persons who have been successful in the competitive process and who wish to apply for a licence to pay the amount for the licence determined by the competitive process and to make an application; and ii setting out criteria for the Secretary to grant a licence to an applicant; and iii requiring the Secretary to notify applicants of the Secretary’s decision and to refund amounts paid for the licence by unsuccessful applicants. This section is only a guide to the general scheme and effect of this subpart. 12 Secretary to invite expressions of interest The Secretary may invite an expression of interest for a licence by giving public notice. The public notice must specify— a the number of licences in respect of which an expression of interest is invited; and b the minimum amount of capital that a person must have access to in order to conduct online casino gambling; and c the information that must be included in an expression of interest; and d the date by which an expression of interest must be submitted (in accordance with section 13(1) ). 13 Expression of interest for licence A person who wishes to submit an expression of interest for a licence to the Secretary must do so within— a 20 working days of the public notice being given under section 12 ; or b a longer period that the Secretary may allow. An expression of interest must— a include the information set out in section 14 ; and b be in a form approved by the Secretary; and c be accompanied by the prescribed fee (if any). 14 Information to be included in expression of interest A person’s expression of interest for a licence must include the following information: a the person’s full name, physical address, and contact details: b each key officer’s full name, position title, physical address, and contact details: c a full disclosure of the person’s ownership structure, if applicable (including details about the jurisdictions in which each person who is part of the ownership structure is resident, incorporated, or otherwise has or is treated as having a presence): ca information about any contribution that the person makes or intends to make for community purposes in New Zealand: d information about any significant influence that the person has over an existing licence: e information that the person is aware of about any person that would have significant influence over the licence that the expression of interest relates to, if the licence were granted: f information about the gambling platform through which the person intends to conduct online casino gambling: g information about the branding (for example, slogans or logo designs) that the person intends to use in conducting online casino gambling: h whether the person or a key officer has, in the last 7 years,— i been convicted of, or investigated for, a relevant offence: ii been found to have breached, or been investigated for a breach of, any relevant legislation: iii been placed in receivership, gone into liquidation, or been adjudged bankrupt: iv been found by the Advertising Standards Authority, or an equivalent overseas authority, to have breached any requirement or standard (whether or not legally binding) set by the authority: v been prohibited from being a director or promoter of, or being concerned or taking part in the management of, a company or other body: vi been a director of a company that has been placed in receivership or gone into liquidation: vii held any securities in, or been a director or promoter of, or been concerned or taken part in the management of, a person who conducts, or who has applied for a licence to conduct, gambling or online casino gambling in New Zealand and, if so, details of that person: viii held 1 or more of the following licences: A a licence under this Act: B a class 3 operator’s licence: C a class 4 operator’s licence: D an equivalent licence granted overseas: ix had any licence referred to in subparagraph (viii) suspended or cancelled or had an application for the renewal of such a licence refused: i information regarding the source and amount of capital available to the person to conduct online casino gambling. 15 Criteria for accepting expression of interest The Secretary may accept a person’s expression of interest only if the Secretary is satisfied that— a the person has access to the amount of capital specified in the public notice given under section 12(2)(b) ; and b in the last 7 years, none of the following persons have been convicted of a crime involving dishonesty or an equivalent overseas crime or offence: i the person: ii the chief executive of the person, if applicable: iii the chief financial officer of the person, if applicable: iv the chief operating officer of the person, if applicable: v a person performing functions equivalent to those of any of the persons mentioned in subparagraphs (ii) to (iv) , if applicable; and c the person has provided the information required under section 14 . However, the Secretary must not accept an expression of interest from a person if the Secretary considers that doing so is likely to prejudice New Zealand’s international reputation with regards to trade or the maintenance of the law. In this section, crime involving dishonesty has the same meaning as in section 2(1) of the Crimes Act 1961. 16 Secretary to run competitive process The Secretary must invite a person whose expression of interest has been accepted to participate in a competitive process to determine— a who may apply for the licence; and b the amount payable for the licence. The Secretary may determine— a the form of competitive process to be used (for example, an auction or a tender); and b how the competitive process is to be run. The Secretary must, at least 10 working days before the start of the competitive process, give written notice to the person of the following matters: a the form of competitive process to be used: b details on how to participate in the competitive process: c the date on which the competitive process starts and ends. The Secretary must, as soon as is reasonably practicable after the competitive process ends, notify the person in writing— a whether the person may apply for a licence; and b the amount payable for the licence; and c that, under section 17(7) , the Secretary may retain part of the amount paid for the licence if the person withdraws their application. 17 Application for licence This section applies to a person who has been notified under section 16(4)(a) that they may apply for a licence. If the person wishes to apply for the licence, the person must first pay to the Secretary the amount notified under section 16(4)(b) . After paying the amount for the licence, the person must apply for the licence. The application must be made within 20 working days after the person is notified under section 16(4) or a longer period that the Secretary may allow. The application must— a include the information set out in section 18 ; and b be in a form approved by the Secretary; and c be accompanied by the prescribed fee (if any). If the person does not apply for the licence within the period required under subsection (4) , the Secretary must refund the amount paid for the licence under subsection (2) . However, if the person withdraws their application, the Secretary may retain part of the amount paid for the licence to cover costs of administering the competitive process that the Secretary considers reasonable. 18 Information to accompany licence application An application made under section 17 must be accompanied by the following information: a the applicant’s— i advertising and marketing strategy; and ii consumer protection strategy; and iii harm prevention and minimisation strategy; and iv compliance strategy; and b the applicant’s business plan for conducting online casino gambling in New Zealand, including details about— i the applicant’s goals and objectives; and ii the structure of the applicant’s management and operations; and iii the applicant’s financial viability and projections; and c the applicant’s physical address for service in New Zealand; and d details about the gambling platform, branding, and user interface that the applicant proposes to use to conduct online casino gambling; and e details about any changes to the information that was required to be provided under section 14 . The Secretary may require the applicant to provide any further information relating to their application within a specified period. 19 Criteria for granting licence The Secretary must not grant a licence to an applicant unless the Secretary is satisfied that— a the applicant has met the requirements in sections 17 and 18 ; and b the applicant is willing and able to comply with the duties and requirements under this Act; and c the applicant is suitable to hold a licence. In assessing whether the applicant is suitable to hold a licence under subsection (1)(c) , the Secretary must take into account the information provided under sections 14 and 18(1)(e) (including whether the applicant has a presence in New Zealand and whether the applicant makes contributions for community purposes in New Zealand) and any other matters that the Secretary considers relevant to the suitability of the applicant. The Secretary must not grant a licence to a person if granting the licence would result in— a more than 15 licences being held at any time; or b any person having significant influence over more than 3 licences. A person has significant influence over a licence if— a the person is the licence holder; or b the percentage of the voting power that the person can directly or indirectly exercise or control at meetings of the licence holder is 20% or more; or c the percentage of securities in the licence holder that the person directly or indirectly owns or controls is 20% or more. The Secretary must not grant a licence to a person to conduct online casino gambling that— a is substantially similar to, and is likely to be in competition with, a protected New Zealand lottery; or b involves betting on the outcome of a protected New Zealand lottery. In determining whether any online casino gambling is substantially similar to, and is likely to be in competition with, a protected New Zealand lottery, the Secretary must have regard to— a the nature and type of the gambling; and b the method and frequency of drawing, if applicable; and c the value of the prizes to be won. 20 Requirements if licence granted If the Secretary decides to grant a licence, the Secretary must— a notify the applicant in writing of— i the decision; and ii the applicant’s right under section 32 to seek a review of the Secretary’s decision to impose any conditions; and b provide a copy of the licence to the applicant. 21 Requirements if licence refused If the Secretary refuses to grant a licence, the Secretary must— a notify the applicant in writing of— i the decision and the reasons for the decision; and ii the applicant’s right to appeal the decision under section 35 ; and b refund to the applicant the amount paid for the licence under section 17(2) . 22 Licence contents A licence must specify— a the name of the operator; and b the gambling platform and branding that the licence authorises the operator to use; and c the period for which the licence is in force (including as a result of any renewal); and d any conditions imposed on the licence under section 23 . The Secretary may amend a licence to take into account any changes to the matters specified in subsection (1)(a) to (d) . 23 Licence conditions The Secretary may, at any time,— a impose conditions on a licence; or b amend or revoke any existing conditions. If the Secretary imposes a condition on a licence, the Secretary must give written notice to the operator of— a the condition; and b the reason for the condition; and c the operator’s right to seek a review under section 32 . If the Secretary amends or revokes a condition, the Secretary must give written notice to the operator of— a the amendment or revocation; and b the reason for the amendment or revocation; and c in the case of an amendment, the operator’s right to seek an internal review under section 32 . 24 Licence duration A licence remains in force for 3 years after the date that it is granted unless the Secretary specifies a shorter period in the licence. However, if an operator applies for renewal of their licence under section 26 , the licence remains in force until the Secretary determines the application under section 27 . A licence ceases to be in force— a while it is suspended: b if it is cancelled: c if it is surrendered. 25 Licence not transferable A licence is not transferable to another person. 26 Renewal of licence An operator who wishes to apply to the Secretary for renewal of the operator’s licence must do so at least 6 months before the date on which the licence expires. However, the Secretary may, at their sole discretion, accept an application for renewal that is submitted late. An application for renewal must be accompanied by— a details about any changes to the information that was required to be provided under— i section 14 ; and ii section 18 ; and b confirmation that, as far as the operator is aware, the operator is complying with, and has at all times complied with, any conditions imposed under section 23 or otherwise an explanation of any breaches of the conditions; and c the prescribed fee (if any). The Secretary may require the operator to provide, within a specified period, any further information to enable the Secretary to determine the operator’s continued suitability to hold a licence. 27 Decision on renewal of licence The Secretary must not renew a licence unless the Secretary is satisfied that the criteria in sections 15 and 19 continue to be met. A licence may be renewed once only. If the Secretary decides to renew a licence, the licence remains in force for 5 years after the date of renewal unless the Secretary specifies a shorter period in the licence. The Secretary must notify the operator in writing— a of the Secretary’s decision on the application; and b in the case of a refusal, of the reasons for the decision. 28 Suspension and cancellation of licence The Secretary may suspend or cancel a licence if the Secretary is satisfied that— a any of the criteria in sections 15 and 19 are no longer met; or b the operator is not complying with, or has not complied with, a duty or requirement under this Act; or c the operator has provided information that is materially false or misleading, including in relation to— i an application for a licence or renewal of a licence; or ii any investigation by the Secretary. The Secretary may exercise the power of suspension in respect of a breach that falls within subsection (1) whether or not— a the breach continues at the time that the power is exercised or is proposed to be exercised; or b a penalty is available for the breach. 29 Procedure for suspension and cancellation of licence If the Secretary proposes to suspend or cancel a licence, the Secretary must— a notify the operator in writing with reasons for the proposed suspension or cancellation; and b give the operator at least 20 working days to respond; and c consider any response provided by the operator before making a decision to suspend or cancel the licence. If the Secretary decides to suspend a licence, the Secretary must give written notice to the operator that sets out— a the reasons for the suspension; and b the day on which the suspension takes effect; and c the duration of the suspension, which must not be longer than 6 months from the day the notice is given; and d the operator’s right of appeal under section 35 . The Secretary may lift a suspension before it ends if the Secretary considers that the non-compliance on which the suspension is based has been rectified. If the Secretary decides to cancel a licence,— a the Secretary must give written notice to the operator that sets out— i the reasons for the cancellation; and ii the day on which the cancellation takes effect; and iii the operator’s right of appeal under section 35 ; and b the Secretary must not invite expressions of interest in relation to that licence under section 12 until all rights of appeal in relation to the decision to cancel the licence are exhausted. 30 Surrender of licence An operator may apply to surrender the operator’s licence at any time by giving written notice to the Secretary. An application to surrender a licence must be accompanied by any fees, charges, or levies outstanding in relation to the licence. On receiving an application to surrender a licence, the Secretary may— a request the operator to provide any information that the Secretary considers necessary; and b impose conditions that the operator must comply with before the Secretary consents to the surrender. The Secretary must consent to the surrender if— a the operator complies with subsection (2) ; and b the operator has provided any additional information requested under subsection (3)(a) ; and c the operator has complied with any conditions imposed under subsection (3)(b) . 31 Obligations not affected by expiry, suspension, cancellation, or surrender The expiry, suspension, cancellation, or surrender of an operator’s licence does not affect any existing obligations of the operator under this Act, including to— a reward winners for gambling participated in before the licence expired or before the licence was suspended, cancelled, or surrendered; and b allow consumers to access their online casino gambling accounts and withdraw funds from those accounts; and c comply with requirements in relation to record-keeping and reporting. 32 Review of Secretary’s decision to impose or amend condition An operator may apply for a review of a decision by the Secretary to impose or amend a condition under section 23 . The application must— a be made in writing to the Secretary— i within 15 working days after the Secretary gives written notice of the decision under section 23 or by any later date permitted by the Secretary; and ii in a form approved by the Secretary; and b state the reasons for making the request. 33 Process for review On receiving an application for review under section 32 , the Secretary must ensure that the decision is reviewed— a as soon as is reasonably practicable after the request is made; and b by a person (the reviewer ) other than the person who made the original decision. In reviewing the decision, the reviewer must act independently of the person who made the original decision. The Secretary may, by written notice, require the operator to provide any further information in connection with the review within 10 working days of that written notice. If the operator does not provide the further information within the required time, the reviewer may review the decision on the basis of the information held by the Secretary. 34 Outcome of review After conducting the review of a decision, the reviewer may confirm, modify, or reverse all or part of the decision or make a new decision. The Secretary must, as soon as is reasonably practicable after conducting the review, give written notice to the operator of— a the decision on the review; and b the reasons for the decision on the review. 35 Appeal to High Court against certain licensing decisions A person may appeal to the High Court against a decision of the Secretary to— a refuse to grant a licence to the person: b suspend or cancel the person’s licence. A person must bring an appeal within 15 working days of being notified of the relevant decision. However, the High Court may, on the application of a party to an appeal, extend the time period for bringing an appeal. The High Court Rules 2016 and sections 126 to 130 of the District Court Act 2016 apply to an appeal under subsection (1) — a as if it were an appeal under section 124 of the District Court Act 2016; and b with all necessary modifications. A decision to suspend or cancel a person’s licence is not reversed merely because the person appeals against the decision under this section or appeals against a decision of the High Court under section 36 . 36 Further appeal to Court of Appeal A party to an appeal under section 35 may appeal to the Court of Appeal against a decision of the High Court on a question of law with the leave of the Court of Appeal. An application for that leave must be made to the Court of Appeal within 20 working days after the date of the decision against which the party wishes to appeal. The Court of Appeal hearing an appeal has the same power to adjudicate on the appeal as the High Court had. The decision of the Court of Appeal on any application for leave to appeal, or on an appeal, is final. 37 Ensure gambling platform is operating and available An operator must ensure that the gambling platform authorised by the operator’s licence is operating and available to consumers in New Zealand within— a 90 days of the commencement of the licence; or b a longer period notified in writing to the operator by the Secretary. An operator must ensure that the gambling platform is operating and available to consumers in New Zealand for at least 270 days in total in any 12-month period. Any day during which the licence is suspended must be disregarded for the purposes of calculating— a the period under subsection (1) ; or b the 12-month period under subsection (2) . 38 Ensure gamblers are at least 18 years old An operator must take all reasonable steps to ensure that a person who participates in online casino gambling on the operator’s platform is at least 18 years old. 39 Minimise risk of harm from online casino gambling An operator must take all reasonable steps to ensure that the risk of harm from online casino gambling is minimised, including complying with any procedures set out in regulations for that purpose. 40 Exclude certain persons An operator must take all reasonable steps to ensure that a person is excluded from gambling on its gambling platform if the person has, in accordance with any procedures set out in regulations,— a identified themselves to the operator as a problem gambler; or aa recorded themselves as wishing to be excluded from online casino gambling in the register established by regulations under section 75(2A) ; or b requested the operator to exclude them from the operator’s gambling platform; or c been identified by the operator as a problem gambler. 41 Display registration icon and play registration audio mark An operator must display a registration icon as required by the Secretary— a on the gambling platform that is authorised under the operator’s licence; and b on any visual advertisement that the operator publishes or arranges to publish in relation to online casino gambling in a manner that enables the advertisement to be brought to the attention of a person who is in New Zealand. An operator must play a registration audio mark as required by the Secretary— a on the gambling platform that is authorised under the operator’s licence; and b during any advertisement that uses audio that the operator publishes or arranges to publish in relation to online casino gambling in a manner that enables the advertisement to be brought to the attention of a person who is in New Zealand. An operator must ensure that any registration icon or registration audio mark is removed from the operator’s gambling platform and any advertisement that the operator publishes or arranges to publish as soon as is reasonably practicable, but no later than 24 hours, after the operator’s licence— a is suspended or cancelled; or b is surrendered; or c expires. A person who is not permitted to conduct online casino gambling under section 9 or to publish or arrange to publish an advertisement relating to online casino gambling under section 10 must not display a registration icon or play a registration audio mark on a gambling platform or advertisement. 42 No credit for online casino gambling A person who conducts online casino gambling must not offer or provide credit if the person knows or ought to know that the credit is intended to be used for gambling. 43 Collect and retain certain information An operator must— a collect any information (including personal information) that is specified in regulations or minimum standards prescribed under section 80 for the duration of their licence; and b retain that information for 7 years following the expiry, cancellation, or surrender of their licence. 44 No arrangement for significant influence over more than 3 licences An operator must take all reasonable steps to ensure that— a the operator does not have significant influence over more than 3 licences; and b the operator does not participate in an arrangement that results in any person having significant influence over more than 3 licences. 45 Complaints process An operator must— a establish, maintain, and administer a publicly available complaints process in accordance with regulations; and b ensure that complaints are investigated and responded to— i in accordance with that complaints process; and ii within 40 working days of being received. 46 Complaints register An operator must establish and maintain a complaints register. The complaints register must contain the following information in relation to every complaint received by the operator: a the date the complaint was received: b the name of the complainant (if provided): c details of the complaint: d how the complaint is responded to: e the date the complaint is closed. The operator must keep the register up to date. An operator must provide the Secretary with the following information every 3 months: a the number of complaints made to the operator in the previous 3 months: b any information about complaints set out in regulations. The Secretary may require an operator to provide the Secretary with— a further information regarding a specific complaint; or b the whole or part of the complaints register. 47 Changes relating to ownership or significant influence An operator must notify the Secretary in writing if the operator becomes aware that— a a person who previously had significant influence over the operator’s licence has ceased to have significant influence over it; or b a person who previously did not have significant influence over the operator’s licence has gained significant influence over it; or c the operator or the operator’s licence is part of, or is likely to be part of, an arrangement that results in any person having significant influence over more than 3 licences; or d the operator has amalgamated, or is likely to amalgamate, with another licence holder under a law that results in 2 or more persons amalgamating and continuing as 1 person; or e the operator has acquired, or is likely to acquire, all of the securities in another licence holder. The operator must notify the Secretary as soon as is reasonably practicable, but no later than 5 working days, after becoming aware of the matter. The Secretary must, as soon as is reasonably practicable following a notification under subsection (2) , carry out an assessment to determine whether the criteria under sections 15 and 19 continue to be met. 48 Changes relating to key officers An operator must notify the Secretary in writing as soon as is reasonably practicable, but no later than 5 working days, after a new key officer is employed or engaged by the operator. The operator must— a provide the Secretary with the information set out in section 14(h) in relation to the new key officer; and b pay the prescribed fee (if any) for the Secretary to assess the new key officer. 49 Other circumstances and changes An operator must notify the Secretary in writing of any of the following circumstances that have occurred since the operator was granted a licence: a the operator or a key officer has— i been convicted of, or investigated for, a relevant offence: ii been found to have breached, or been investigated for a breach of, any relevant legislation: iii been adjudicated bankrupt, placed in receivership, or gone into liquidation: iv been found by the Advertising Standards Authority, or an equivalent overseas authority, to have breached any requirement or standard (whether or not legally binding) set by the authority: v been prohibited from being a director or promoter of, or being concerned or taking part in the management of, a company or other body: vi been a director of a company that has been placed in receivership or gone into liquidation: b a key officer stops being a key officer or becomes incapable of performing the duties of that person’s position: c a change is made to— i the name of the operator or a key officer; or ii the operator's physical address for service in New Zealand; or iii any other information that has been previously provided by the operator to the Secretary under this Act: d any other change that may affect the ability of the operator to comply with duties or requirements under this Act. The operator must— a notify the Secretary as soon as is reasonably practicable, but no later than 5 working days, after becoming aware that the circumstance has occurred or is likely to occur; and b pay the prescribed fee (if any) for the Secretary to assess the circumstance. 50 Meaning of civil liability act A person carries out a civil liability act if— a the person breaches this Act or any secondary legislation made under it, including (without limitation) if the person— i conducts online casino gambling in breach of section 9 ; or ii publishes or arranges to publish advertisements relating to online casino gambling in breach of section 10 ; or iii displays or plays, or fails to display or play, a registration icon or registration audio mark in breach of section 41 ; or iv offers or provides credit in breach of section 42 ; or v fails to comply with a take-down notice issued by the Secretary under section 56 ; or vi fails to comply with a requirement to provide information under section 71 ; or vii breaches a condition of the person’s licence; or b the person provides false or misleading information to the Secretary under this Act. However, a person who commits an offence under section 66 does not carry out a civil liability act. 51 Formal warnings The Secretary may, by written notice, issue 1 or more formal warnings to a person if the Secretary is satisfied that the person has carried out a civil liability act. A formal warning must— a state the reason for the formal warning; and b be in a form approved by the Secretary. The Secretary must, as soon as is reasonably practicable after issuing a formal warning, give public notice of the warning. The Secretary must ensure that any personal information and commercially sensitive information is redacted from the publicly notified warning, unless the Secretary considers that publicly notifying the information is necessary or desirable to achieve the purposes of this Act. 52 Enforceable undertakings The Secretary may accept a written undertaking given by a person in connection with a matter relating to a civil liability act or an alleged civil liability act. An undertaking may include (without limitation) any of the following: a an undertaking to take action to avoid, remedy, or mitigate a civil liability act: b an undertaking to pay to the Secretary all or part of the Secretary’s costs incurred in investigating, or bringing proceedings in relation to, a civil liability act. An undertaking may include an admission of liability by the person giving it in relation to the civil liability act or alleged civil liability act to which the undertaking relates, but otherwise does not constitute an admission of liability. The person may withdraw or vary the undertaking with the written agreement of the Secretary. However, the undertaking may not be varied to relate to a different civil liability act or alleged civil liability act. 53 Notification requirements for undertakings The Secretary must give the person seeking to make an undertaking written notice of— a the Secretary’s decision to accept or reject the undertaking; and b the reasons for the decision. If the Secretary accepts an undertaking, the Secretary must, as soon as is reasonably practicable, publicly notify the following: a the undertaking: b a brief description of the circumstances and nature of the civil liability act to which the undertaking relates: c the Secretary’s reasons for accepting the undertaking: d any withdrawal or variation of the undertaking. The Secretary must ensure that any personal information and commercially sensitive information is redacted from the matters publicly notified under subsection (2) , unless the Secretary considers that publicly notifying the information is necessary or desirable to achieve the purposes of this Act. 54 When undertaking becomes enforceable An undertaking takes effect and becomes enforceable— a on the date the Secretary gives notice of acceptance of the undertaking; or b at any later date specified by the Secretary. A person must not breach an undertaking given by that person that is in force. No proceedings for a civil liability act may be brought against a person if— a an undertaking is in force in relation to that act and the person is not in breach of the undertaking; or b the person has completely discharged the undertaking. The Secretary may accept an undertaking in relation to a civil liability act or alleged civil liability act before proceedings in relation to that act have been completed. If the Secretary accepts an undertaking while proceedings are under way but before they are completed, the Secretary must take reasonable steps to have the proceedings discontinued as soon as is reasonably practicable to the extent that the proceedings relate to that civil liability act or alleged civil liability act. 55 Breach of undertaking If the Secretary considers that a person has breached an undertaking, the Secretary may apply to the High Court for an order under subsection (2) . If the court is satisfied that the person who made the undertaking has breached it, the court may make 1 of the following orders: a an order directing the person to comply with the undertaking: b an order discharging the undertaking. The court may also make any other order that the court considers appropriate in the circumstances, including orders directing the person to pay to the Secretary— a the costs of the proceedings; and b the reasonable costs of the Secretary for ongoing monitoring of compliance with the undertaking. 56 Issue of take-down notices The Secretary may issue a take-down notice to a person who does not hold a licence if the Secretary considers that the person is— a conducting online casino gambling in breach of section 9 ; or b publishing or arranging to publish an advertisement relating to online casino gambling in breach of section 10 . The take-down notice may require the person to take any measures that the Secretary considers necessary or desirable to— a prevent the gambling platform through which the person is conducting online casino gambling from being accessible to persons in New Zealand; or b prevent the advertisement from being brought to the attention of persons in New Zealand. 57 Content of take-down notices A take-down notice must contain the following: a the name of the person subject to the notice: b the gambling platform or advertisement in respect of which the notice is issued: c the reason for the notice: d the required action under section 56(2) : e the date and time by which the notice must be complied with, which must be within 2 days of the date the notice is issued to the person. The notice may contain any other information that the Secretary considers appropriate. 58 Person to comply with take-down notice A person who is issued a take-down notice must comply with it as soon as is reasonably practicable but no later than the date and time specified in the notice. 59 Enforcement of take-down notices The Secretary may take enforcement proceedings in the High Court if a person who has been issued a take-down notice fails or refuses to comply with it by the required date. In proceedings under this section, the court— a must not examine or make a determination about the issuing or merits of a take-down notice: b may— i determine whether the person had a reasonable justification for failing or refusing to comply with the notice by the date and time specified in the notice or for any further delay after that; and ii order a remedy under section 60 . 60 Remedies In proceedings under section 59 , the High Court may order a person who has been issued a take-down notice to comply with it by a date specified in the order. 61 Pecuniary penalty order The Secretary may apply to the High Court for an order that a person ( person A ) pay a pecuniary penalty to the Crown in relation to a civil liability act. The court may make the order if it is satisfied that person A has carried out a civil liability act. The court must not make the order if person A satisfies the court that— a the conduct constituting the civil liability act occurred due to— i the act or omission of another person that was beyond person A’s control; or ii person A’s reasonable reliance on information supplied by another person (other than person A’s director, employee, or agent); or b person A took steps that were reasonable in the circumstances to prevent the civil liability act. 62 Considerations for court in determining pecuniary penalty In determining whether to make an order, and the amount of any pecuniary penalty to be paid, the court must have regard to all relevant matters, including— a the nature and extent of the civil liability act: b the circumstances in which the civil liability act occurred: c the nature and extent of loss or damage caused to any person as a result of the civil liability act: d the nature and extent of any commercial gain made or commercial loss avoided by the person who carried out the civil liability act: e whether the civil liability act is likely to prejudice the integrity of the regulatory regime for online casino gambling: f whether the person involved in the civil liability act has been found to have engaged in similar conduct— i for which the person has been formally warned under section 51 ; or ii for which proceedings were taken for enforcement of an undertaking under section 55 ; or iii in previous pecuniary penalty proceedings brought under section 61 . Subsections (3) and (4) state the limits on the amounts of pecuniary penalty that the court may order. In relation to a civil liability act specified in section 50(1)(a)(vi) or (b) (which relates to failing to provide information and providing false or misleading information), the limit is $10,000. In relation to any other civil liability act,— a for an individual, the limit is $300,000; and b for any other person, the limit is $5 million. Subsection (6) applies if— a the court finds, whether in the same or separate proceedings, that a person is liable to pay a pecuniary penalty in respect of 2 or more instances of conduct that relate to the same civil liability act; and b those instances of conduct are of the same or a substantially similar nature and occurred at or about the same time. The total amount of any pecuniary penalty imposed on the person in respect of those instances of conduct must not exceed the amount of the maximum pecuniary penalty that may be imposed in respect of a single instance of that conduct. 63 Rules of civil procedure and civil standard of proof apply A proceeding for a pecuniary penalty is a civil proceeding and the usual rules of court and rules of evidence and procedure for civil proceedings apply (including the standard of proof). 64 Limitation period for proceedings A proceeding for a pecuniary penalty must be commenced within 7 years after the date on which the civil liability act was carried out. 65 Liability of principals and employers This section applies if the person who is liable for a pecuniary penalty ( person A ) was acting as the agent or employee of another person ( person B ) at the time of the civil liability act. Person B is liable in the same manner and to the same extent as if person B had personally engaged in conduct constituting the civil liability act if it is proved— a that the act or omission that constituted the civil liability act took place with person B’s actual or apparent authority, or express or implied permission or consent; or b that person B knew that the civil liability act was occurring or was to occur and failed to take reasonable steps to prevent or stop it. Person B’s liability does not affect person A’s liability. A court that makes an order for a pecuniary penalty against a body corporate may also make an order against a director or person concerned in the management of the body corporate if it is proved— a that the act or omission that constituted the civil liability act took place with the director or person’s authority, permission, or consent; or b that the director or person knew that the civil liability act was occurring or was to occur and failed to take reasonable steps to prevent or stop it. 66 Online casino gambling on behalf of person under 18 years A person commits an offence if the person— a participates in online casino gambling on behalf of a person in New Zealand who is under the age of 18; and b knows, or is reckless as to whether, that person is under the age of 18. A person who commits an offence against subsection (1) is liable on conviction to a fine not exceeding $10,000. 67 Time for filing charging document Despite anything to the contrary in section 25 of the Criminal Procedure Act 2011, the limitation period in respect of an offence under section 66 ends on the date that is 2 years after the date on which the offence was committed. 68 Complaints to Secretary A person may complain in writing to the Secretary about— a an operator’s conduct of online casino gambling; or b the outcome of a complaint to an operator; or c the way in which an operator handled a complaint; or d a civil liability act or alleged civil liability act carried out by any person. A person may complain to the Secretary under subsection (1) without first complaining to the person to whom the complaint relates. A complaint must specify the grounds on which it is made. 69 Decision to investigate complaint In deciding whether to investigate a complaint, the Secretary must take into account the following matters: a the extent of actual or potential harm arising from the alleged conduct: b the culpability of the person to whom the complaint relates: c whether the complaint relates to duties of the operator under this Act: d whether or not investigating the complaint will maintain the integrity of the regulatory regime for online casino gambling or otherwise further the purposes of this Act. The Secretary must notify the complainant of the Secretary’s decision under subsection (1) . If the Secretary decides to investigate a complaint, the Secretary must,— a if the complainant agrees, give the person to whom the complaint relates a copy of the complaint; or b in any other case, give the person a summary of the complaint. The Secretary must— a give the person to whom the complaint relates a reasonable opportunity to make written comments on the complaint; and b consider any comments made by the person before making a decision on the complaint. The Secretary may require the person to whom the complaint relates or the complainant to provide further information regarding the complaint. 70 Outcome of investigation After investigating a complaint, the Secretary must, as soon as is reasonably practicable, notify the complainant and the person to whom the complaint relates in writing of the following: a the Secretary’s decision in relation to the complaint: b whether any action has been or will be taken in relation to the complaint: c the nature of that action. 71 Secretary’s power to require information The Secretary may, by written notice, require a person to provide the Secretary with information in the person’s possession or control. However,— a the Secretary may do so only if the Secretary considers that the information is necessary or desirable for the purposes of performing the Secretary’s functions or duties, or exercising the Secretary’s powers, under this Act, including— i determining whether a person is complying with this Act (including any secondary legislation made under it or any licence conditions): ii sharing information with an overseas regulator under section 72 : iii complying with a request by an overseas regulator to inquire into a matter under section 73 : iv conducting research, or policy analysis and development, associated with the purposes of this Act; and b the Secretary must not— i require a person to provide personal information for the purposes of paragraph (a)(iv) ; or ii use or disclose any information obtained for the purposes of that paragraph as evidence in proceedings. A written notice under subsection (1) must specify— a the information that must be provided: b the date by which the information must be provided: c if applicable, that the information is required for the purposes of— i sharing information with an overseas regulator under section 72 ; or ii complying with a request by an overseas regulator to inquire into a matter under section 73 . The written notice may— a specify the manner or form in which the information is to be provided; and b require the information to be provided regularly, at specified intervals, or in respect of specified periods. A person given a written notice must comply with it within the time specified in the notice. Nothing in this section limits or affects legal professional privilege. 72 Sharing of information with overseas regulators The Secretary may provide to an overseas regulator any information that the Secretary— a holds in relation to the performance or exercise of the Secretary’s functions, duties, or powers under this Act; and b considers may assist the overseas regulator in the performance or exercise of its functions, duties, or powers. However, the Secretary may provide information to an overseas regulator under this section only if the Secretary is satisfied that appropriate protections are or will be in place for the purpose of maintaining the confidentiality of information provided (in particular, personal information). The Secretary may impose any conditions in relation to information provided to an overseas regulator, including conditions relating to— a maintaining the confidentiality of information provided (in particular, personal information): b storing, using, or accessing information provided: c copying, returning, or disposing of copies of documents provided: d paying the costs incurred by the Secretary in providing information or in generally complying with a request. In considering what conditions (if any) to impose, the Secretary must have regard to whether conditions are necessary or desirable in order to protect the privacy of any individual. The Secretary may use any information provided to it by an overseas regulator in the performance or exercise of the Secretary’s functions, duties, or powers under this Act. 73 Power of Secretary to act on requests of overseas regulators An overseas regulator may request the Secretary to inquire into any matter related to the functions of that overseas regulator. In determining whether to comply with a request under subsection (1) , the Secretary must take into account— a whether compliance will affect the performance of the Secretary’s other functions under this Act; and b whether appropriate protections are or will be in place for the purpose of maintaining the confidentiality of information provided (in particular, personal information); and c any other matters that the Secretary considers appropriate. 74 Public register of operators and licences The Secretary must maintain a register with details of— a each operator, including— i the operator's physical address for service in New Zealand: ii a description of the operator’s gambling platform and the methods for accessing it: iii a summary of any enforcement action taken against the operator: b each licence, including— i the commencement date of the licence: ii the expiry date of the licence: iii any licence conditions: iv whether the licence has been renewed: v whether the licence is current, suspended, cancelled, surrendered, or expired: c any other matters relating to this Act that the Secretary thinks fit. The Secretary must— a make the register available on an internet site maintained by or on behalf of the Secretary in a form that is readily accessible to the public at all reasonable times; and b keep the register up to date. 75 Regulations relating to harm prevention and minimisation The Governor-General may, by Order in Council made on the recommendation of the Minister, make regulations for all or any of the following purposes: a prescribing limits on the amounts that may be bet, paid, or staked as consideration in online casino gambling: aa prescribing limits on the amounts that may be deposited into an account on a gambling platform: b prescribing limits on prizes, payouts, and returns from online casino gambling: c prescribing limits on the duration and frequency of participation in online casino gambling: d prescribing procedures to enable players to set limits of the kind described in paragraphs (a) to (c) in relation to their online casino gambling: e prescribing the minimum or maximum payout ratio or average rate of return to a player: f restricting or prohibiting inducements to participate in online casino gambling: g enabling the Secretary to specify information or messages (for example, harm minimisation messages) that operators must or must not display to players (including specifying criteria relating to the kinds, frequency, and delivery mechanisms of such information or messages): ga enabling the Secretary to specify where information or messages required to be displayed under paragraph (g) must be displayed: h prescribing procedures to enable the identification of problem gamblers (including the grounds on which a person may be identified as a problem gambler and the sources of information that must or may be considered or sought to assist in identifying problem gamblers): i prescribing procedures for enabling a person to identify themselves to the operator as a problem gambler or request the operator to exclude them from the operator’s gambling platform: j prescribing procedures for excluding a person who the operator has reasonable grounds to believe is a problem gambler: k prescribing the rights of a person who is excluded under such a procedure, including rights of appeal against specified decisions: l prescribing procedures that must be completed by the operator and a person to allow that person access to a gambling platform from which they have been excluded: la enabling the Secretary to specify the information that an operator must collect to identify, assist, and monitor problem gamblers and how that information must be used: m prescribing features, technology, or systems that must be used in relation to gambling platforms for the purposes of giving effect to any matters under paragraphs (a) to (la) : n prescribing the use of pre-commitment, player-tracking, or other harm-minimisation devices, technology, or systems in or associated with online casino gambling. Regulations made under subsection (1) may apply— a to specified persons or classes of person: b to specified gambling platforms or classes of gambling platforms: c to any particular games, or classes of games, or categories, classes, or forms of online casino gambling. Without limiting the regulations that the Minister may recommend under subsection (1) , the Minister must, no later than 1 December 2027, recommend regulations under that subsection that— a establish a register of persons who wish to be excluded from online casino gambling; and b ensure that any person is able to— i record themselves in the register as wishing to be excluded from online casino gambling; and ii remove any such record; and c ensure that the register is in a form that is readily accessible to operators at all reasonable times; and d allow for the costs of administering the register to be recovered from operators; and e make any other provision that is necessary or desirable for the purposes of administering the register. Regulations made under this section are secondary legislation ( see Part 3 of the Legislation Act 2019 for publication requirements). 76 Regulations relating to consumer protection and record-keeping The Governor-General may, by Order in Council made on the recommendation of the Minister, make regulations for all or any of the following purposes: a prescribing procedures for verifying the age and identity of customers: b prescribing procedures for checking the background of customers: c prescribing requirements in relation to record-keeping and reporting: d prescribing payment methods that an operator may or may not accept from a player (for example, credit cards): e prescribing procedures that an operator whose licence expires or is suspended, cancelled, or surrendered must follow in dealing with customers: f prescribing procedures for terminating customer accounts: g prescribing procedures for the management of consumer deposits and funds, including the withdrawal of uncommitted funds and winnings: h prescribing procedures for ensuring that players are able to make informed decisions about participating in online casino gambling, including for informing players about game rules and odds: i prescribing procedures for ensuring that game designs and features are not misleading: j prescribing procedures for reporting, managing, and minimising collusion, cheating, and the use of technology to automate participation in online casino gambling: k prescribing the form and content of complaints processes under section 45 . Regulations made under subsection (1) may apply— a to specified persons or classes of person: b to specified gambling platforms or classes of gambling platform: c to specified games or classes of games, or categories, classes, or forms of online casino gambling. Regulations made under this section are secondary legislation ( see Part 3 of the Legislation Act 2019 for publication requirements). 77 Regulations relating to advertising and marketing The Governor-General may, by Order in Council made on the recommendation of the Minister, make regulations for the purposes of controlling the advertising and marketing of online casino gambling, including regulations specifying requirements in relation to— a the form of advertisements; and b the content of advertisements; and c the timing, frequency, and volume of advertisements; and d the location and placement of advertisements; and e the audiences at which advertisements may be targeted or to which the advertisements may be designed to reasonably appeal; and f the use of endorsements, sponsorships, and similar third-party arrangements in advertisements (including prohibiting such use); and g record-keeping in relation to advertisements. Regulations made under subsection (1) may apply— a to specified persons or classes of person: b to specified gambling platforms or classes of gambling platform: c to specified classes of advertisements: d to specified games or classes of games, or categories, classes, or forms of online casino gambling. Without limiting the regulations that the Minister may recommend under subsection (1) , the Minister must, no later than 1 December 2026, recommend regulations under that subsection for the purposes of— a minimising the risk of harm from the advertising and marketing of online casino gambling; and b minimising the advertising and marketing of online casino gambling to persons who are under 18 years old. Regulations made under this section are secondary legislation ( see Part 3 of the Legislation Act 2019 for publication requirements). 78 Regulations relating to fees, levies, or charges The Governor-General may, by Order in Council made on the recommendation of the Minister, make regulations prescribing fees, levies, or charges to enable the recovery of the direct and indirect costs of the Secretary in— a publicising and informing people about the requirements of this Act: b administering, enforcing, and monitoring compliance with this Act: c doing anything else authorised or required by this Act. Examples of the costs that may be recovered include— a the costs of processing expressions of interest: b the costs of processing applications (including applications for renewals of licences): c the costs of issuing licences: d the costs of assessing any changes in circumstances notified under sections 47 to 49 : e the costs of internal reviews: f the costs of providing, operating, and maintaining systems, databases, or other processes in connection with the administration of this Act: g the costs of services provided by third parties (for example, credit-checking agencies). Regulations made under subsection (1) may specify— a the matters in respect of which fees, levies, or charges are payable: b the amounts of fees, levies, or charges or the method or rates by which they are to be assessed: c the person or classes of person liable for payment of the fees, levies, or charges: d the circumstances in which a penalty for default in payment is payable: e the circumstances in which the payment of the whole or a part of any fees, levies, or charges may be remitted or waived: f the manner in which the fees, levies, or charges are to be paid: g procedures for reviewing and reassessing fees, levies, and charges. Regulations made under this section are secondary legislation ( see Part 3 of the Legislation Act 2019 for publication requirements). 79 Regulations relating to other matters The Governor-General may, by Order in Council made on the recommendation of the Minister, make regulations for all or any of the following purposes: a declaring anything not to be online casino gambling for the purposes of this Act: b declaring anything not to be online casino gambling technology for the purposes of this Act: ba amending the limits on pecuniary penalties in section 62(3) and (4) to take into account any movements in the Consumers Price Index since the limits were last set: c prescribing systems for the management and operation of online casino gambling: d auditing, reporting on, and monitoring persons who conduct or promote online casino gambling: e requiring specified persons to retain documents and information relating to online casino gambling: f prescribing requirements relating to the presentation of financial reports by licence holders: g prescribing systems or processes to ensure compliance with this Act: h prescribing systems or processes ancillary to online casino gambling, including the method of paying prizes: i providing for any other matters that are contemplated by, or necessary for giving full effect to, this Act and its due administration. Regulations made under subsection (1) may apply— a to particular persons or classes of person: b to particular gambling platforms or classes of gambling platform: c to particular games or classes of games, or categories, classes, or forms of online casino gambling. In subsection (1)(ba) , Consumers Price Index means the New Zealand Consumers Price Index (All Groups) published by Statistics New Zealand or, if that index ceases to be published, any measure certified by the Government Statistician as being equivalent to that index. Regulations made under this section are secondary legislation ( see Part 3 of the Legislation Act 2019 for publication requirements). 80 Minimum standards relating to online casino gambling technology The Secretary may prescribe minimum standards for the design, manufacture, or performance of any online casino gambling technology. Minimum standards may include (without limitation) specifications regarding— a functions of online casino gambling technology: b information or messages to be displayed or accessible on online casino gambling technology: c user interface features to be included with online casino gambling technology: d information that online casino gambling technology must generate or collect. Minimum standards may incorporate, by reference, all or part of a principle, statement, standard, specification, or requirement that is published by, or on behalf of, any body or person in any country. If a principle, statement, standard, specification, or requirement that is incorporated by reference into a minimum standard is amended, the amendment does not become part of the minimum standard until it is notified by the Secretary. Before prescribing any minimum standards under this section,— a the Secretary must consult any person who the Secretary considers is likely to be directly affected by the standards; and b the Minister must be satisfied that the Secretary has consulted in accordance with this section. The process for consultation must, to the extent practicable in the circumstances, include— a giving adequate and appropriate notice of the intention to make the minimum standards; and b giving a reasonable opportunity for interested persons to make submissions; and c adequate and appropriate consideration of submissions. However, a failure to consult does not affect the validity of the minimum standards. The Secretary may declare, by notice, that any online casino gambling technology must be verified by the Secretary as complying with particular minimum standards before it may be used by an operator under a licence. The Secretary may require an operator to provide the Secretary with written confirmation from a particular body that any online casino gambling technology complies with particular minimum standards. The Secretary may require an operator to monitor and test any online casino gambling technology. Without limiting subsection (9A) , the Secretary may specify— a the type of monitoring and testing that must be conducted; and b the particular body that must conduct the monitoring and testing; and c how often the monitoring and testing must be conducted; and d the particular certification or documentation relating to the monitoring and testing that the operator must provide to the Secretary. The following are secondary legislation ( see Part 3 of the Legislation Act 2019 for publication requirements): a minimum standards under this section: b a notice under subsection (4) or (8) . 80A Principal Act Sections 80B and 80C amend Section 80B amends the Gaming Duties Act 1971. 80B Section 12U amended (Offshore gambling duty) In section 12U, replace the rate of 12% with the rate of 16% . 80C New section 12WA inserted (Ring-fenced online gambling duty) After section 12W, insert: 12WA Ring-fenced online gambling duty 1 The Commissioner must, at the intervals or times that the relevant Minister directs, pay 25% of the online gambling duty paid to the Commissioner under section 12W into such account opened under section 286 of the Gambling Act 2003 as the Secretary for Internal Affairs directs. 2 In this section, relevant Minister means the Minister of the Crown who, with the authority of the Prime Minister, is for the time being responsible for the administration of subpart 3 of Part 3 of the Gambling Act 2003. 80C Principal Act Sections 80D to 80F amend the Gambling Act 2003. 80D Principal Act Sections 80E and 80F amend the Gambling Act 2003. 80D Section 4 amended (Interpretation) In section 4(1), insert in its appropriate alphabetical order: online gambling duty funding , for a financial year, means an amount that— a is expressly authorised to be incurred for the purposes of section 286(4) in that financial year by an appropriation, or other authority, by or under an Act; and b is calculated as a percentage of the online gambling duty that is paid, or is estimated to have been paid, to the Crown under section 12U of the Gaming Duties Act 1971 in the previous financial year 80E Section 4 amended (Interpretation) In section 4(1), insert in its appropriate alphabetical order: ring-fenced online gambling duty means the online gambling duty paid by the Commissioner of Inland Revenue under section 12WA of the Gaming Duties Act 1971 80E Section 274 amended (Function of Board) In section 274, after profits of New Zealand lotteries , insert and online gambling duty funding . 80F Section 274 amended (Function of Board) In section 274, after profits of New Zealand lotteries , insert and ring-fenced online gambling duty . 80F Section 286 amended (Bank accounts) After section 286(3), insert: 4 The Secretary must, on the day or days determined by the Secretary in each financial year, pay the online gambling duty funding for that financial year, out of public money, into an account that is opened under subsection (1) for the purposes of this subpart. 81 Service of notices A notice required or authorised to be served on any person under this Act may— a be served on an individual— i by delivering it personally or by an agent (such as a courier) to the person; or ii by sending it by post addressed to the person at the person’s usual or last known place of residence or business; or iii by sending it by email to the person’s email address provided by the person for the purpose: b be served on a company, within the meaning of the Companies Act 1993, in a manner provided for in section 388 of that Act: c be served on an overseas company in a manner provided for in section 390 of the Companies Act 1993: d be served on any other body corporate in a manner in which it could be served if the body corporate were a company within the meaning of the Companies Act 1993. In the absence of proof to the contrary, a notice sent to a person in accordance with— a subsection (1)(a)(ii) must be treated as having been served on the person when it would have been delivered in the ordinary course of post; and, in proving the delivery, it is sufficient to prove that the notice was properly addressed and posted: b subsection (1)(a)(iii) must be treated as having been served on the person on the second working day after the day on which it is sent. Section 392 of the Companies Act 1993 applies for the purposes of subsection (1)(b) to (d) . If a person is absent from New Zealand, a notice served on the person’s agent in New Zealand in accordance with subsection (1) must be treated as having been served on the person. If a person has died, the notice may be served, in accordance with subsection (1) , on their personal representative. 82 Consequential amendments to legislation Amend the legislation specified in Schedule 2 as set out in that schedule. 1 Transitional, savings, and related provisions This clause applies to any person who, on the commencement of this clause, is conducting online casino gambling in a manner that enables a person who is in New Zealand to participate in the gambling. If the person applies for a licence to conduct online casino gambling under section 17 before 1 December 2026 , the prohibition in section 9(1) does not apply to the person until the earlier of— a the day after the Secretary notifies the person that the Secretary has granted or refused to grant the licence; and b 1 June 2027 . In all other cases, the prohibition in section 9(1) does not apply to the person until 1 December 2026 . 2 Consequential amendments In section 5(1), insert in their appropriate alphabetical order: online casino gambling has the same meaning as in section 5 of the Online Casino Gambling Act 2025 online casino operator has the same meaning as operator in section 5 of the Online Casino Gambling Act 2025 In section 5(1), definition of reporting entity , after paragraph (a)(i), insert: ia an online casino operator: In section 5(1), definition of transaction , replace paragraph (c)(i) and (ii) with: i the placing of any bet unless— A authorised under the Racing Industry Act 2020; or B the bet is placed in the course of online casino gambling: ii participation in gambling (as defined in section 4(1) of the Gambling Act 2003) unless— A authorised under the Racing Industry Act 2020; or B the gambling is online casino gambling: After section 6(4)(d), insert: da in the case of an online casino operator, the operator carries out activities that may give rise to a risk of money laundering or financing of terrorism: After section 48(b)(vi), insert: vii the Online Casino Gambling Act 2025 . In section 130(1)(d), after casinos, , insert online casino operators, . In section 137(6) and (7), after the Gambling Act 2003, , insert the Online Casino Gambling Act 2025 , . After section 140(2)(p), insert: paaa the Online Casino Gambling Act 2025 : In section 4(1), insert in their appropriate alphabetical order: online casino gambling has the same meaning as in section 5 of the Online Casino Gambling Act 2025 online casino operator has the same meaning as operator in section 5 of the Online Casino Gambling Act 2025 In section 4(1), definition of remote interactive gambling , after paragraph (b)(ii), insert: iia online casino gambling; or In section 4(1), definition of remote interactive gambling , paragraph (b)(iii), after located outside New Zealand , insert that is not online casino gambling . After section 9(1)(b), insert: ba online casino gambling; or After section 15(4), insert: 5 This section does not apply to a person conducting online casino gambling ( see section 42 of the Online Casino Gambling Act 2025 ). After section 16(2)(d), insert: da an advertisement relating to online casino gambling ( see section 10 of the Online Casino Gambling Act 2025 ); or After section 20(2)(c), insert: d recognises gambling authorised by or under the Online Casino Gambling Act 2025 . After section 52(4)(c)(ii), insert: iia the Online Casino Gambling Act 2025 (including secondary legislation made, and licences granted, under that Act); and After section 68(1)(c)(ii), insert: iia the Online Casino Gambling Act 2025 (including secondary legislation made, and licences granted, under that Act); and After section 276(1)(a), insert: aa the amount of ring-fenced online gambling duty online gambling duty funding in hand at the date of the statement: In the heading to section 277, replace profits with amounts . In section 277(1), after profits of New Zealand lotteries , insert and ring-fenced online gambling duty online gambling duty funding . In section 277(7), after Profits of New Zealand lotteries , insert and ring-fenced online gambling duty . In section 278(1), after profits of New Zealand lotteries , insert and from ring-fenced online gambling duty online gambling duty funding . In the heading to section 279, replace profits with amounts . In section 279(1), after profits of New Zealand lotteries , insert and from ring-fenced online gambling duty online gambling duty funding . In section 281(1)(a), after undistributed profits of New Zealand lotteries , insert and undistributed ring-fenced online gambling duty online gambling duty funding . In section 281(2)(a), after profits of New Zealand lotteries , insert and ring-fenced online gambling duty online gambling duty funding . In section 282(1), after profits of lotteries , insert and from ring-fenced online gambling duty online gambling duty funding . In section 284(5), after profits arising from New Zealand lotteries , insert or to be ring-fenced online gambling duty online gambling duty funding (as the case may be) . In section 287(1), after profits of New Zealand lotteries , insert and any ring-fenced online gambling duty online gambling duty funding . In section 287(2), after profits arising from New Zealand lotteries , insert or to be ring-fenced online gambling duty online gambling duty funding (as the case may be) . In section 289, insert as subsection (2): 2 There may be paid out of undistributed ring-fenced online gambling duty online gambling duty funding the amounts that the Minister approves— a for any purposes in connection with the management, investment, and distribution of ring-fenced online gambling duty online gambling duty funding : b for the dissemination of information relating to the distribution of ring-fenced online gambling duty online gambling duty funding : c for the administration of this subpart. In the heading to section 290, delete of profits . In section 290(1)(b), replace section 245. with section 245; and . After section 290(1)(b), insert: c ring-fenced online gambling duty online gambling duty funding . In section 290(2), after true accounts with respect to , insert ring-fenced online gambling duty online gambling duty funding for that year and . In section 293(1) and (2), after undistributed profits of New Zealand lotteries , insert and out of undistributed ring-fenced online gambling duty online gambling duty funding . After section 318(1)(h)(iii), insert: iiia at least 1 representative of online casino operators; and After section 319(3), insert: 3A The regulations may impose the levy on an online casino operator regardless of whether the operator is in or outside New Zealand. After section 320(3)(a)(iii), insert: iiia for an online casino operator, means turnover less prizes paid and payable; and In the Part 2C heading, replace Offshore with Online . In section 12S(1), insert in their appropriate alphabetical order: class 3 gambling has the meaning set out in section 4(1) of the Gambling Act 2003 class 3 operator’s licence has the meaning set out in section 4(1) of the Gambling Act 2003 gambling operator has the meaning set out in section 4(1) of the Gambling Act 2003 Lotteries Commission has the meaning set out in section 4(1) of the Gambling Act 2003 lottery has the meaning set out in section 4(1) of the Gambling Act 2003 online gambling means any gambling or prize competition that a person who is resident in New Zealand pays an amount of money to participate in through the supply of remote services but does not include— a gambling conducted by the Lotteries Commission; or b gambling authorised under the Racing Industry Act 2020; or c a sales promotion scheme that is in the form of a lottery and is conducted in New Zealand; or d class 3 gambling in the form of a lottery conducted by any gambling operator that holds a class 3 operator’s licence that allows the gambling operator to conduct a lottery online gambling operator — a means a registered person who conducts any online gambling; and b for any return period and the obligations and liabilities under sections 12U to 12W of a person who was at any time during that period an online gambling operator, includes that person notwithstanding that the person may have ceased, during or after the return period, to be an online gambling operator within the meaning of paragraph (a) sales promotion scheme has the meaning set out in section 4(1) of the Gambling Act 2003 In section 12S(1), repeal the definitions of offshore gambling and offshore gambling operator . In section 12S(1), definition of return period , replace offshore with online in each place. In section 12S(2), replace offshore with online . In the heading to section 12T, replace Offshore with Online . In section 12T(1), replace Offshore with Online . In section 12T(1), (2)(a) and (b), and (6), replace offshore gambling with online gambling in each place. In the heading to section 12U, replace Offshore with Online . In section 12U, replace offshore with online . In the heading to section 12W, replace offshore with online . In sections 12U, 12V, 12W, and 12X, replace offshore with online in each place. In Schedule 7, after clause 34A, insert: 34B Department of Internal Affairs: online gambling duty Section 18 does not prevent the Commissioner from communicating information to a person who is an employee of the Department of Internal Affairs that— a the person is authorised by the department to receive; and b the Commissioner considers is not undesirable to disclose and is essential to enable the person to carry out any duty lawfully conferred on the person under the Online Casino Gambling Act 2025 . In regulation 3, insert in its appropriate alphabetical order: online casino operator has the same meaning as operator in section 5 of the Online Casino Gambling Act 2025 In regulation 5, after casino operators, , insert online casino operators (whether in or outside New Zealand), . After regulation 7, insert: 7A Online casino operator must provide return and pay levy 1 An online casino operator must, no later than the due date for each return period,— a provide to the Commissioner a return, in the prescribed form, of the levy payable for the return period; and b pay the levy to the Commissioner. 2 In this section— due date , in relation to a return period, means— a 7 May if the return period ends on 31 March; or b in any other case, the 28th of the month following the end of the return period return period means any period of 3 consecutive calendar months that ends with the last day of March, June, September, or December. In the Schedule, after the item relating to casino operators, insert: This table is small in size and has 2 columns. This table amends the Schedule of the Gambling (Problem Gambling Levy) Regulations 2025 and should be read with that table to provide understanding of the context. Online casino operator 1.24

Hansard

April 22, 2026

Online Casino Gambling Bill — Third Reading · Full day report

Online Casino Gambling Bill Third Reading Hon BROOKE VAN VELDEN (Minister of Internal Affairs) (11:09): I move, That the Online Casino Gambling Bill be now read a third time. Today marks an important milestone in strengthening New Zealand’s approach to gambling harm and consumer protection. The Online Casino Gambling Bill represents a significant and long-overdue step forward. The bill also supports this Government’s coalition agreement. Before the House reaches its final decision on the Online Casino Gambling Bill, I want to acknowledge the many people who have contributed to its development. I thank the Governance and Administration Committee members for their consideration of this bill, and I thank all those who took the time to make submissions on online casino gambling. I also acknowledge colleagues across the House for their engagement throughout the bill’s passage, and I thank my officials for their work on this bill. As members of this House will be aware, online casino gambling is already widespread, easily accessible, and currently unregulated. There is no recourse when things go wrong. That is the gap that this bill seeks to close. This bill establishes a licensing syst…
Read full Hansard debate
Online Casino Gambling Bill Third Reading Hon BROOKE VAN VELDEN (Minister of Internal Affairs) (11:09): I move, That the Online Casino Gambling Bill be now read a third time. Today marks an important milestone in strengthening New Zealand’s approach to gambling harm and consumer protection. The Online Casino Gambling Bill represents a significant and long-overdue step forward. The bill also supports this Government’s coalition agreement. Before the House reaches its final decision on the Online Casino Gambling Bill, I want to acknowledge the many people who have contributed to its development. I thank the Governance and Administration Committee members for their consideration of this bill, and I thank all those who took the time to make submissions on online casino gambling. I also acknowledge colleagues across the House for their engagement throughout the bill’s passage, and I thank my officials for their work on this bill. As members of this House will be aware, online casino gambling is already widespread, easily accessible, and currently unregulated. There is no recourse when things go wrong. That is the gap that this bill seeks to close. This bill establishes a licensing system for online casino operators. It sets out clear requirements for harm minimisation, creates a strong enforcement regime, and ensures that a share of revenue returns to New Zealand communities. This bill allows for a competitive market while also providing Kiwis who wish to gamble with safer, regulated options to do so. Licensed operators will have to meet consumer protection obligations, including minimising the risk of harm from online casino gambling. They must identify and assist those experiencing harm, exclude problem gamblers, and must not offer credit for gambling. This bill allows up to 15 licences to be issued for online casino gambling. Operators from overseas and in New Zealand can apply if they are suitable. They must meet strict criteria, including having a harm prevention strategy and providing information on their business compliance history. Once licensed, they will be able to advertise with restrictions and be required to pay tax and contribute towards the problem gambling levy. Operators will clearly need to show that their gambling platforms are licensed so the public can easily see which services are legitimate and regulated in New Zealand. This will require a registration icon or audio mark to be displayed on any advertising and gambling platforms. The Department of Internal Affairs will regulate the sector, with costs recovered from licensed operators. To ensure the regime is effective, the bill makes clear that operators cannot avoid New Zealand law by being located offshore. The bill gives the regulator strong enforcement tools, including take-down notices, warnings, enforceable undertakings, and penalties of up to $5 million for serious or persistent breaches. This bill also ensures that New Zealand communities benefit through changes to the online gambling duty. Funding will be returned to communities through the Lottery Grants Board. This reflects the clear message from submissions on the bill. If we are regulating online gambling, benefits should flow back to local sports clubs, community groups, and grassroots organisations. I listened and we are delivering on what matters most to communities across this country. Importantly, this funding will come from an activity that is already occurring rather than from increasing gambling participation. It is not the Government’s intention with this bill to increase gambling but to make sure it is safer for those who choose to gamble. The Government will review the regime once it’s been in place. This will consider how well harm minimisation, consumer protection, and community funding objectives are being met. A separate two-year review will look at impacts on other forms of gambling, community markers, and community returns. This review allows the adjustment of any settings that are not working for operators and consumers and allows this licensing regime to respond and adapt to emerging international trends. A separate two-year review will look at impacts on other forms of gambling and community returns. The bill enables the Government to set detailed regulatory requirements for how licensed operators may operate here in New Zealand, including harm prevention and minimisation, advertising and marketing restrictions, consumer protections, record keeping, and cost recovery fees. This approach is consistent with the Gambling Act 2003 and ensures that the regulatory framework can remain responsive to market and technology while giving operators clear and enforceable requirements to plan and operate in the New Zealand market. In relation to advertising, the intent is to support a safe and well-regulated market, not to encourage increase gambling participation. Carefully controlled advertising allows consumers to identify licensed operators and make informed choices while helping to channel demand away from unlicensed operators. The regulations I’ve proposed will mean operators must not target advertisements at those under the age of 25 unless the operator can demonstrate that the advertisement can be precisely targeted at consumers over the age of 18, and the content of advertisements and promotions must not reasonably appeal to those under the age of 18. Setting these requirements, including fees, through regulations rather than here in the primary legislation provides flexibility to adjust settings as the market develops and as better information on market size and regulatory costs become available. This approach supports proportional cost-reflective fees over time and gives operators greater certainty by clearly stating compliance requirements and updating them as the market evolves. This bill is a balanced and practical piece of legislation that will support the Government’s coalition agreement. I commend this bill to the House. ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Greg O'Connor): The question is that the motion be agreed to. LEMAUGA LYDIA SOSENE (Labour—Māngere) (11:16): Talofa lava, Mr Speaker. Thank you for the opportunity to provide a contribution. Before I do that, in case I do not get any chance today, I do want to just honour our Anzac men and women and specifically veterans as we remember them this weekend. As spokesperson for Labour, I tell members that we continue to oppose the Online Casino Gambling Bill. Yes, while we agree with the regulation in the bill in terms of regulating, we would state that the bill does not go far enough. We’ve heard the statement from the Minister, and I do want to acknowledge the 4,837 individuals and groups who submitted—of that number, 3,966 in the first, initial draft of the bill. There was no community return for our communities who may be involved in online casino gambling. The reason why, on this side of the House, the Labour team stresses the up to 15 new licences that this bill will allow to be brought into New Zealand is because there is limited information and regulations that do not go far enough in terms of harm minimisation tools and consumer protections. I also want to acknowledge the officials who worked with the select committee, and I want to acknowledge the select committee members. We collaborated, we discussed the pros and cons, but we also had the opportunity to hear from submitters across Aotearoa, in terms of harm minimisation and what is being brought into New Zealand. In our view, the licences are far too many for New Zealanders to practically understand the controls that, we say, do not go far enough. There was a lot of evidence put forward by submitters, which gave us select committee members the opportunity to consider why this legislation requires very proactive controls. It is important that New Zealanders understand things like gambling addiction. The difference between online casino gambling and land-based casinos is that land-based casinos, those specific businesses, understand the operations that open and close to people. With online casino gambling, those licences offshore will be able to do their business 24/7. The issue with that is that vulnerable communities across Aotearoa, at a time when affordability and the cost of living are really hitting vulnerable New Zealanders, some of those choices will not be able to be made attentively by vulnerable New Zealanders who have an addiction to online gambling. In our view, specifically what the statistics tell us is that things like controls on advertising need to go further in term of this amendment bill. We are pleased that the Government U-turned in October 2025; that the Cabinet made a ruling, or a provision, that there would be a community return—return back to the communities across Aotearoa. If you look at the evidence, the Minister stated in some of her explanations, that New Zealanders have to be very careful because addiction is high when it comes to gambling. Online gambling will propose 24/7 access, and the trouble with that activity is that it will be able to be accessed on any device. There are limited controls, and in our view, for Labour, we want to see those strengthened. We heard from submitters, such as the Problem Gambling Foundation, that there needed to be very clear words in the amendment bill that will help them help New Zealanders who are very vulnerable to this type of activity. The oral submissions that were made by groups, iwi Māori, Pasifika, ethnic, and Chinese raised that, with some of the individuals who will be utilising this online casino gambling to do their activity, the problem is it is such a hidden activity. It might not be popular in terms of some parts of our community, but it is important to raise the health issues and the mental ability of some of the consumers who will be using some of those sites. We are also concerned about the lack of protections that have been provided under this legislation. Labour continues to believe that, for some of the proceeds that will come from these companies, there has to be a mechanism. When the Gambling Act was set up in 2003, there was the authorisation that some gambling could occur, which was mainly written for land-based gambling operations. The online casino gambling legislation, we would argue, still doesn’t provide the assurance that Kiwis will be protected by this bill. The offshore gambling duty that is proposed in this bill rests at between 12 percent to 16 percent—the gross gambling revenue—and in our submission it proposes the 4 percent. We would argue that it needs to be raised either to 8 percent or over, because that will ring-fence the proceeds for our communities to be returned to the community, which sits between a $10 million to $20 million figure. Labour continues to argue that the controls that are proposed in this bill continue not to go far enough, and we would like to see those strengthened in any future iterations. One of the things, when we went through committee stage, was to ask the Minister to consider tools such as the self-exclusion register. When you look at the bill and the provisions, what happens is that there’s a number of different dates. Once the bill goes through Royal assent, it will be introduced in terms of what that proposes, and then there are other tools that strengthen the bill, but the dates of the proposal, of the commencement date, is a much later date. The self-exclusion register was one of the tools that we wanted, on this side of the House, to be input from the start of the actual legislation, because there are consumers, or there are New Zealanders, who, once the doors are open, in terms of those licences, who will come into New Zealand, do their advertising—actually some of them are already in New Zealand. We have social media influencers, which the Department of Internal Affairs has been dealing with. They’re also doing non-authorised activity. We do, again, acknowledge that community return. We heard from communities, groups, and individuals up and down Aotearoa. The fact that they require those community returns—because a lot of them are doing class 4 activity through Lotto and through their organisations. I know we’ve heard from the Minister that the reliance on that revenue is something she would like to see deterred, however, there is no system to replace the community returns to our community. The last point I wanted to raise in my time left was the distribution system. We heard from a number of submitters, and we support that the community grant system—the current system—will go through the lottery grants system, which is a central system with a number of controls, and also delays. Labour supports that a local system would be helpful. We heard from the submission of Mr Martin Snedden, in terms of the thoughts that he put forward in his submission, and we would strongly support that. So, just as I end off, Labour continues to oppose this amendment bill. MIKE DAVIDSON (Green) (11:26): Thank you, Mr Speaker. I rise on behalf of the Green Party to oppose this bill. The Green Party do support good and sensible regulation that is focused on harm reduction and risk minimisation. However, this bill is not that. One of the purposes of this bill is to prevent and minimise harm from online casino gambling; however, it just doesn’t do that. What it does do is gather revenue. This bill is a money-grab that will create misery. Once again, it’s just another example of this Government, which values profits over people, and to ensure they make as much money as they can, this Government will auction off their licences to overseas entities that, like this Government, do not care who or what it hurts. We know from the feedback from other agencies on this regime that there was some serious concerns about the harm that would be caused by this bill. The Ministry of Health stated: “However, it seems from the paper that very little mention of harm prevention or minimisation is proposed for the bill beyond the purpose, with almost all the detail delegated to regulations. While we understand the benefit of regulations in a fast-evolving environment, we think that some more parameters around harm prevention and minimisations need to be in the bill to anchor to the purpose.” Te Whatu Ora said: “We welcome the intention to regulate online gambling but are concerned that the proposed regulations will increase gambling and lead to an increase in gambling harm. First, we’re concerned that the Cabinet paper does not reflect the potential for harm that online gambling presents. The regulatory impact statement (RIS) provides evidence and discussion on this, but it is not well-reflected in the paper. We encourage you to make the potential for harm more visible so that legislative proposals can be considered in this context. Specifically, we note that online gambling is particularly harmful as it’s continuous, easily accessible, and easy to hide.” The RIS notes that the number of presentations to gambling harm services with offshore online gambling listed as a main mode of harm has increased by 71 percent since 2019—a 1,500 percent rise in the number of adults gambling with offshore providers between 2010 and 2020, and growing from around 7,000 adults to 105,000 adults. It is known that online gambling poses higher risks of addiction by being available 24/7. It allows gamblers to hide their gambling by moving it on to their personal device and into their homes. It can lack effective safeguards around age verification of gamblers. And we know, if you look at the e-scooters, they’re also meant to be over 18. The amount of younger people under 18 that are actually riding those scooters, and that’s because the operator is not there and present when they’re being ridden. This poses problems of regulations due to the online and remote nature of the gambling environment. Problem gambling among those who gamble on the internet is ten times higher than that of the general population. It was extremely clear that this bill would increase harm amongst people—amongst vulnerable people—but it got pushed through without actually fixing that big issue. From the notes from the regulatory impact statement on the costs: gambling harm treatment providers may experience an increase in direct costs due to increased resourcing requirements. This is showing that there will be increased harm. We assume that these costs will be offset by the collection of the problem gambling levy by licensed operators. You cannot offset harm by a levy. The wider public will experience some indirect costs, namely the cost of gambling harm, which we assume will be partially offset by the problem gambling levy. Once again, you cannot offset the social harm, the costs, the impacts on whānau, financial standing, wellbeing, and mental health, through a levy on offshore operators. Through the process in the Governance and Administration Committee—which I wasn’t in on; I joined a little bit later—there were, obviously, 4,837 groups and individuals who submitted. Out of that, 3,966 raised issues on the community returns. On the back of that, the gambling duty was increased from 12 to 16 percent, with 25 percent of that revenue ring-fenced for community. I think we all have to accept that is a double-edged sword, because there are so many great, not-for-profit community groups that do rely on the proceeds of gambling services to survive. However, we must accept that the money coming to them is coming at a cost to the wellbeing of our community who are the ones that are suffering from gambling harm. During the committee of the whole House, the Minister introduced an amendment that would effectively remove the ring-fencing of the 25 percent. She did say that there were reasons to do that to make it a more simple process. She said that the amount returned to the community can, therefore, be increased through amendment by Cabinet rather than amended in legislation. I think what she forgot to mention at that time was it could also be decreased. My colleague Dr Lawrence Xu-Nan did ask: is the funding gambling duty still ring-fenced for the purpose of allocation and distribution for community purposes? Would the removal of the 25 percent mean that the new amount would be less or significantly less than 25 percent? Naturally, the Minister avoided answering that question properly. She did thank him and said the funding collected from the duty for the purpose of community returns will be transferred through the Budget process and Cabinet will decide the amount. Therefore, it does not require to be ring-fenced. Cabinet had decided the percentage, which is 16 percent, out of the Gaming Duties Act. But this is better flexibility. What we know, through this, is that the Cabinet can actually reduce the amount that was meant to be ring-fenced for community. Now, I brought in a simple amendment—I brought a simple amendment; a common-sense amendment that would ensure that it could not go below what the committee wanted, which was 4 percent—25 percent of the actual gambling duties. But it was voted down. So you put that at risk, something that, actually, the community, in their thousands, asked for. We know from this that there are many demographics that are hugely affected by gambling: Māori, Pacific people, young people, people with disabilities are all more likely to be impacted by gambling. I just want to quickly touch on just a couple of what they said in my short time left. I’ll pick up—which one shall we do? Brain Injury New Zealand, who obviously opposed this terrible bill. “We do not believe the bill’s harm minimisation provisions go far enough. Without stronger safeguards, online gambling may cause serious harm to vulnerable groups, particularly those with brain injury.” Hon Melissa Lee: It already is doing harm. Jeez. MIKE DAVIDSON: So you may heckle on the sides, but it is clear by what you are saying that you don’t care about the vulnerable people in our community that will suffer by this bill when it gets passed into legislation. The Salvation Army: they recognise the need for effective regulation, like we do on this side. They were deeply concerned that the bill does not prioritise harm prevention and minimisation, and that the approach to regulation proposed is inadequate. Once again, this bill will cause harm. We know that, actually, the consultation, the engagement with iwi was pathetic; it did not exist. The Pou Tangata chair, Rahui Papa, said, “Let’s be clear, this reform will expose more young people to risk. It is gambling harm by stealth.” The Asian Family Services: “The substance of the Bill does not reflect the statutory objective of harm minimisation.” ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Greg O'Connor): The member’s time has come to an end. TIM COSTLEY (National—Ōtaki) (11:36): Let’s be very clear: there are two options when we get to vote very soon. One, we do nothing. We let the current online gambling continue unregulated, no assistance for harm prevention, no money coming back to the community—nothing. Or we vote for this legislation. It’s not just GST; it’s not just gambling harm. It is money going to community organisations. Now, I agree; I didn’t like where the ACT Party started with the bill. That is why we have fought hard, and National has delivered community returns. I held public meetings in my electorate, I met with everyone and every group that would, and we have fought hard for and delivered community returns. By voting against it, they are voting for no money at all to go to our community. Who was it who asked for a national self-exclusion register? It was the National Party. Who is it that’s delivering money for our community? The National Party. Greens and Labour talk a big game. They’re delivering nothing for our community. They’re opposing only good things. National Party are proud to support this. I commend the bill. ANDY FOSTER (NZ First) (11:37): Thank you, Mr Speaker. Look, this bill recognises that we live in what is an increasingly digital world. It is a world that, in many areas, is a world without borders. Of course, we know that most of us transact business via email rather than by letters. Most of our business is done via online banking rather than going down to the bank branch. Of course, in the retail area, increasingly, bricks and mortar is challenged by online retail. That is true of gambling even more so. The thing I agree with Mike Davidson on is that he said that it is growing very fast. The Governance and Administration Committee heard that, roughly, New Zealanders are gambling something like $800 million a year, and that is growing very fast. I think even the number used was something like 1,500 percent in a very short period of time. It’s not going to go away. The point that Tim Costley has just made is you can either regulate that, or you can leave it alone. What we heard from Labour and the Greens today—they’ve focused a lot on harm, but we didn’t hear a lot of that at the select committee. We had a bit of discussion; we made some changes. The changes we made were very collaboratively done, for example, making it easier to self-exclude—we did that. It wasn’t just the National Party; it was a collective effort. We also said that we can allow to regulate to say you can’t use credit to gamble—very sensible as well. But what the Opposition are not recognising is that that digital world is here and it is not going to go away. So what we are seeing is more and more—if you like, it’s the wild west—of these overseas-owned cowboys, effectively, coming in and encouraging New Zealanders to gamble online. This bill is the sheriff. This bill is the sheriff coming into town to better protect New Zealanders and to ensure greater benefit for New Zealand. What the Opposition—as Tim Costley just said—seems to be saying is that by not passing the bill, somehow all of this is going to go away, but it’s not. It’s just going to get more and more and more, and it’s going to be unregulated. So the question is, do you want the wild west, or do you want the sheriff? I am on the side of the sheriff in saying we want to regulate this and do a better job. What this bill does is to establish a three-stage process—it’s quite a rigorous process—to issue up to 15 licences. Now, we did hear concerns about whether 15 was too many. Some people said it should be unregulated, uncapped, which would be even more, but we didn’t really have a great deal of evidence to say what the right number would be, nor did we have a great deal of discussion in the select committee. We got an alternative view from the Labour Party at the end of it, but we didn’t have a lot of discussion within the committee to say, “Actually, this is the number and this is why the number.” So there are a bit of crocodile tears being shed here by the Opposition in that area as well. Look, the idea here is that if you have a substantial number of licensed organisations you give some choice as to who people are going to gamble with if they’re going to gamble. I don’t understand why they do it, but if they’re going to gamble it’s safer to do that in a swimming pool that is regulated than to get into the river that is unregulated, with the alligators. That’s your choice: you have a swimming pool that is regulated, you can choose which pool you want to go into, or you’re in the river with the alligators. It also allows some education. It also allows the operators to promote themselves so that people are actually going to say, “I know these people, I know they’re regulated, and I will go with them rather than with somebody who is the alligator in the river.”. I do note, though, that this House has, in terms of promotion and advertising, of course, said that it’s quite happy with advertising going to greater levels on some of the days which people might find somewhat confronting; I’m thinking of Easter, Anzac, and Christmas. So we’ll just see how that goes. It’s good that we’ve got a review in there. As we’ve heard, we had a lot of feedback on this. The sports community were really, really quick to get organised. They did a lot of work. They were very united, and they provided very strong and well-articulated feedback. Their issue was community benefit and what they saw as the threat—and it’s an existing threat; the online gambling is there, it’s growing, and it’s an existing threat to class 4 revenue. I’ve been on both sides of this as a person giving grants out and also as part of organisations which have received grants. That money is essential to many of our sporting and community organisations. So they were rightly concerned that online gambling and the growth of online gambling, if there was nothing to compensate for that, was going to be a real concern, an existential threat, potentially, to them. We’ve had, essentially, a long-term social contract—and it’s in the Gambling Act 2003—that we know that gambling can be harmful. We know that and nobody would disagree with that, but the contract really is that as a result of that we’re saying that gambling comes alongside community benefits, so that the proceeds of gambling go to community benefit. The problem with the bill, and I completely agree with what Tim Costley said here, is I don’t think any of those in that select committee—ACT is not represented in that select committee—liked the bill as it was introduced. That issue of no community benefit was a real problem. Our submitters saw this as breaching that social contract. As we’ve already heard, of the 4,837 submissions that we received, about 3,966 of them—so most of them—raised that issue of community returns. As I said, there was real concern about the erosion or potential erosion of online gambling eroding terrestrial class 4 gambling. We heard that message. I think parties across the House heard that message. Obviously, the Minister for Internal Affairs and Cabinet heard that message and I’d say well done to her for listening and for making the change and for setting aside that 4 percent of gross revenue for community benefit. And, actually, I agree; if that 4 percent was higher, I think that would be a good thing because the biggest beneficiary, not only of this, but also all forms of gambling actually is the Government. The Government could think—doesn’t matter whether it’s a red-led Government or blue-led Government—about whether in fact it gave more money from those proceeds to community and sporting organisations. That’s a decision that executives can make. One last thing I did want to talk about was that the select committees often get tram lines within which they can look at amendments and we make quite a number of, I think, very useful amendments. There’s three I want to pick up that were specifically ones that I promoted. So they’re very much New Zealand First - type ones. The first one of them was picking up the Minister’s change—we knew that Cabinet was going to change, but we said “Let’s add to the purpose of the bill.” So into the purpose of the bill, clause 3 (e) now says that the purpose of the bill—“ensure that money from online casino gambling benefits the community.” So that reflects the change that Cabinet said that it wanted to make. It’s now in the purpose of the bill. Previously it wasn’t there. Another issue which was raised by some of the submitters, particularly some of the community trusts in New Zealand—they said that they wanted to be able to be part of those 15 licences, and in doing that they’re more likely to give more money back to the community. So not only the 4 percent, but they are also—I mean, they are required to distribute their surpluses back to community. That’s a great thing. I said, “Look, can we be part of that?” And so there are two other changes there which make that more likely. The first of them is in clause 14, which requires licence applicants to disclose their intended contributions to New Zealand. Then clause 19 requires the Secretary of Internal Affairs to consider the scope of the licence applicant’s presence in New Zealand—whether they’ve got staff, a base, whatever it might be here—and their planned contributions to the community. So those things make it more likely that—we like putting New Zealand first—New Zealand-based organisations are more likely to be party to those licences. We also made, in that same vein, amendments to ban synthetic lotteries. Why did we do that? To safeguard the Lotto New Zealand revenue, again because that Lotto New Zealand revenue goes to New Zealand community organisations. So all of those things are about making sure that more benefit goes not just to the Crown, but also to the community. Finally, as I’ve already mentioned, the changes that we made as a select committee to tighten up on harm minimisation, which I think were good. There is provision, as you heard from the Minister, to review the bill. I think those things are really, really important because we want to see what has been the impact of increasing online gambling—if it does increase, to what degree?—on class 4 gambling. How well does the new system work? How well does New Zealand Lotteries manage it in terms of distribution? How the advertising provisions work, and how the harm minimisation provisions work, and all of those things are important to review. That’s a good thing. I think that notwithstanding the protestations you’ve heard from the Opposition, this bill is a much, much better bill than it started. It regulates a potentially harmful activity, it improves safety, and it provides, now, for community benefit. I commend this bill to the House. ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Greg O'Connor): This is a five-minute split call. Oriini Kaipara. ORIINI KAIPARA (Te Pāti Māori—Tāmaki Makaurau) (11:46): E te Pīka, tēnā koe. Today we reach the third and final reading of the Online Casino Gambling Bill, a law that will shape the digital gambling landscape of Aotearoa for generations to come. On behalf of Te Pāti Māori and as the member for Tāmaki Makaurau, I rise grounded in the voices of whānau and Māori health providers and community organisations who submitted in unprecedented numbers. There are 61,000 people across Aotearoa currently experiencing harmful gambling—the same as the population of Rotorua. For Te Pāti Māori, our compass is very clear. Mana motuhake—the right of our people to live with dignity and self-determination, mana ōrite—equity and fairness in all systems, and mana mokopuna—the protection of our children and future generations. When we test this bill against those values, it fails every single measure. Mana motuhake—protecting the wellbeing and autonomy of our people. Look, Māori are 3.5 times more likely to experience problem gambling harm. That’s not an accident. It’s the result of decades of targeted gambling access in our poorest suburbs, and communities already carrying the weight of colonisation, poverty, and housing insecurity. Hāpai Te Hauora, the national Māori Public Health organisation, told us that online casino gambling is one of the most harmful forms of gambling: fast-paced, available 24/7, designed to keep people playing until they lose everything. They warned that this bill does not uphold Te Tiriti o Waitangi, it does not embed Māori governance, and it does not protect Māori data or Māori decision making. Turuki Health and Māori providers across Tāmaki Makaurau echoed those same concerns. Gambling harm is intergenerational. It compounds stress, poverty, and whānau breakdown. Without strong protections, this bill will deepen inequalities and inequities for Māori. Mana ōrite—fairness, equity, and community returns. Of the 4,837 submissions, 3,966 raised concerns about the loss of community returns. Class 4 gambling, for all its flaws, at least requires 40 percent of net proceeds to be returned to communities. But this bill allows offshore operators to extract profits with no obligation to reinvest in Aotearoa. The select committee has recommended increasing the gambling duty from 12 percent to 16 percent, and— Andy Foster: Did you read the bill? ORIINI KAIPARA: Yes, I did—and returning 25 percent of that duty to communities through the Lottery Grants Board. That is a good step but it is not equity. It is not mana ōrite because the truth is offshore companies will profit. Māori communities, in fact all communities across Aotearoa, will pay a heavy price. Mana mokopuna—protecting our children and future generations. The number of rangatahi aged between 13—13—and 18 who have engaged in online gambling has risen to 52 percent. That is half of all our young people. This bill sets the online casino age at 18—18—years old, even though you must be 20 to enter a physical casino. That inconsistency exposes rangatahi to one of the most addictive forms of gambling at a younger age, on a device they carry in their pocket. Problem gambling is not an individual failure; it is a system failure. When that system harms our mokopuna, we have a duty to intervene. What is next? As this bill turns into law, Te Pāti Māori will continue to hold future Governments to task to ensure they strengthen this legislation. Māori submitters have been very clear about what is needed: a complete ban on gambling advertising, including influencers and images of wealth; a centralised self-exclusion register that’s operational before licences are granted, not in 2027; a higher age limit; mandatory community returns; Māori co-governance; and stronger harm-minimisation tools. These are not just policy settings; they are expressions of our duty to protect our people. E te Whare, Māori organisations, health providers, and community groups have been unequivocal. They have told us that gambling harm is already devastating whānau, and this bill, when enacted, will make that harm worse. They have told us that our mokopuna, our future, deserve better. We oppose this bill. RICARDO MENÉNDEZ MARCH (Green) (11:51): Thank you, Mr Speaker. Prior to coming to Parliament, I worked at the front lines with people on the benefit and people experiencing poverty. We served them every day as they came through our doors, often asking for hardship assistance to survive. During that time, I met many families whose lives had been wrecked by problem gambling. Other speakers have noted the issues of intergenerational impacts of problem gambling, and I saw those first hand. Families who have not received help had entered into such high levels of debt that they became homeless, or they were about to become homeless, and they were struggling to receive assistance from the agencies that were required to support them. During that time, I also experience what other speakers noted, which was having, as a community organisation, to rely from funds from lotteries, knowing that your ability to serve the community had to come from funds that were directly gathered from harm that was being created as a result of gambling. That was a really, really difficult thing to have to juggle, coming from the community sector. Online gambling does need regulations, and we simply cannot accept the status quo. In scrutinising this bill, we are making a call to vote against it on the merit of the bill itself, not on whether online gambling should be regulated or otherwise. I think others have spoken about some of the key issues that we have, and I particularly wanted to note how disappointing it is to see that there are no provisions basically prohibiting advertising. I think this is a huge misstep by the Government, particularly because, ultimately, we know that the companies that make profits out of creating misery and harm in our communities do target people that they know are more likely to be impacted by the harm that gambling, including online casino gambling, causes in our communities. Prohibiting advertisement would be one way to curtail the impact that these companies have on our communities. I do want to note the attempts made by my colleague Mike Davidson to protect the funds that go to the communities. I echo his concerns around the fact that with the way that the bill is now written, there are no guarantees that at least 25 percent of that revenue is directed back into the community. That leaves it open for a future Government to basically decrease that and simply take more of that for just revenue gathering for the Government. I think this speaks of a conundrum that successive Governments have fallen into, of having no reliable and, in my view, ethical ways of resourcing our community sectors, including our community sports sectors who desperately need adequate resourcing. A lot of the grants that exist are grants that are, basically, created out of misery that is caused in our communities. You cannot, as Mike Davidson outlined, offset that harm through these means. You should not be putting community organisations’ ability to survive against harm that is caused in the community. Something that I raised in the committee stage and committee of the whole House stage and that I do think deserves further work for the Government to explore is around the lack of explicit mention of loot boxes in this bill—I think this is something the Government should do further work on—loot boxes for people who participate in video gaming, particularly computer or mobile gaming. We know that loot boxes are basically a form of online gambling, and they wreck lives. They also target people below the age of 18 particularly. The harm that the loot-box system in video games causes to minors and to families cannot be understated. It’s an area that has not been adequately regulated, and we know from constituency feedback that it causes real financial harm to families. I tried to put in an amendment to add a definition of it so that it would be included in what we considered online casino gambling, but the Minister did not support it. If the Minister thinks that this wasn’t the place to regulate loot boxes, I highly encourage her to look at further work that should be done in this area. I think that while we all agree in this House that online gambling causes real harm and destroys lives, what we haven’t had cross-party agreement on has been on how to tackle corporates that make profit out of misery. This is why the Green Party isn’t supporting this bill and calls on the Government to strengthen this piece of legislation. TOM RUTHERFORD (National—Bay of Plenty) (11:56): Thank you very much, Mr Speaker. I think context in this debate is really important. At present, there is online gambling taking place in New Zealand, and this legislation creates regulation to say, “Enough is enough. We need to bring it into line. We need to have laws in place. We need to make sure we follow proper process, and then, also, we can provide support to those who are impacted by gambling harm across New Zealand.” This is what this bill does. It says we can know who those people are, we can provide them the support they need, but also—and, importantly, as a local sports player and in many local teams in my community—it has a community-return component too, which is a really positive step for sporting and community organisations that receive lotteries grants. Now they will receive them also from online casino gambling. It’s a really positive step forward. It brings it into line to where New Zealand needs to go, so I commend it to the House. INGRID LEARY (Labour—Taieri) (11:57): The characterisation from the Government about what’s going on is really fascinating. They’re talking about regulating an industry that does cause misery. What they haven’t said is that they are regulating it and expanding it at the same time. Listen to the words very closely from the lead Minister, who talked about creating “a competitive market”. Now, that’s a really insightful term there—“a competitive market”. Yes, there currently is online gambling, but it’s around the margins, and there certainly aren’t incentives at the moment for those operators to be competitive against each other in the way that the ACT Party and this particular Minister would like them to be. I think the National Party has fallen asleep at the wheel on this one. The Minister for Mental Health has been missing in action, and the crazy thing about this is that the regime to regulate the online gambling space has occurred, the decision has been made—the Cabinet papers show that—and then everyone’s scratching their heads and going, “What are we going to do to minimise harm?” There was no discussion at the beginning about whether we even wanted this competitive market in our environment and whether the better opportunity would have been to say, “There is online gambling; what are we going to do to minimise it?”, rather than, “What are we going to do to expand it?” This is what has happened in reality, and that’s what happens when you have a coalition Government that is the tail wagging the dog, with the main party asleep at the wheel. The Minister for Mental Health—who likes to say that he’s the first Minister, and he’s all about creating wellbeing for New Zealanders—is allowing our young people to be at the behest of predatory international gambling organisations, who now have full licence, 15 of them potentially, to operate in New Zealand. That is what is going on with this bill, and that is why we oppose it. I too would like to thank the 4,837 different people and organisations who submitted to the select committee. I didn’t get to sit there and listen, but I certainly did read many of the submissions, and I was here for the committee of the whole House stage. That was a fascinating process. On the one hand, we have the reality that this bill is going to allow young people, with their devices carried around with them 24/7, to be exposed to a new competitive advertising marketing regime on online gambling in their homes and away from harm’s way. Then we have a Minister who did not seem to understand the difference between consumer protection and harm minimisation. I asked her very carefully in the committee of the whole House stage about whether she thought the harm minimisation element of this bill was strong enough. She gave answers that related to consumer protection. Now, consumer protection is things like making sure you’re not ripped off, being able to put yourself on to a register if you think you might be in harm’s way, but harm minimisation includes being able to protect young people or those who are already at harm from further harm. It means a positive duty of care on organisations that get licences to make sure they are not causing harm. Those provisions are not in there, and, in fact, we’ve heard already that advertising and marketing, a critical part of this regime, have been relegated to secondary legislation. We don’t even know what that will look like. That means it will be subject to regulatory capture, because there is every incentive for those big international organisations to want to make sure that the regime is as narrow as possible. It is very difficult to tighten regulatory regimes on advertising in this kind of space once they have been set. How can we have a transparent conversation when we do not even know what those provisions look like? It feels to me, really, like this is an ACT agenda, and I’m so sad that the National Party didn’t step up around the mental health side of this. We had a decision that was taken as a fait accompli. We had Cabinet papers that showed officials trying to grapple with harm minimisation and the levy for harm minimisation in the health space, acknowledging explicitly in those papers that a decision had already been taken to create this regime. That is silly. It’s flawed. It’s the right hand and the left hand not really being coordinated, and it shows that this has been led by an agenda outside of health. Now, when we think about gambling, what is gambling designed to do? It is designed to get people involved in a way that they will spend more money. Why is it that in this House we can have very specific debates around details and minutiae about particular alcohol laws over Easter, and yet we do not have a conscience vote and we do not have a health approach on something that is going to open a tsunami of problem gambling and exposure to problem gambling for our young people? We have a mental health crisis. Our youth have been recognised across the board, including by the mental health commission, including by the mental health Minister, as experiencing a crisis, as the front line of what is happening, particularly in the online space. We are having a debate about whether we should be changing the age rules for social media. On the other side of this, we are saying let’s create—not only create; expand—a competitive market for online gambling that our young people will be exposed to 24 hours a day. How on earth does that make sense? It is unintelligent and it is the cart before the horse. Why were the public not able to have a discussion first about whether we even want this sector here, and if the reality is that we have it here, what are we going to do to make sure we minimise the harm? That should be the first principle. It should not be about a tax grab. It is not our young people’s fault that this Government could not make their fiscals work and looked around desperately to try and find where they could get some revenue from and thought, “Oh yeah, gambling—that’s a good one. Never mind the harm. Let’s get this through quickly. Let’s allow our mental health Minister to go silent. Let’s put it in internal affairs and take the wrong approach and put not only this generation but future generations at risk.” Unacceptable. I know this. I’ve seen the documents. I have seen the sequencing that things happened in, and I have heard, with my own unbelieving ears, the Minister’s response to my questions on harm minimisation, which showed she did not understand what that meant. Let’s think about what some of the provisions do. The advertising is being put into secondary regulation. There is risk of regulatory capture there. There is no duty of care anywhere in the bill to try and find some way of capturing the harm that could be happening to young people who are skipping across multiple sites. It is all predicated on the assumption that somebody will go on to a site and, if alarm bells ring because they’ve been on there for a long time, there will be some kind of red flag. But gamblers don’t do that. They go across sites. The Minister was given that evidence in this House and asked the questions. She refused to do anything about that. The Minister was given the evidence about loot boxes. She was given the evidence about loyalty awards, around spins, around the very close link with gamification. These are all massive loopholes in this law, because the definition section is not at pace with the reality that is occurring for our young people. Ricardo Menéndez March, myself, and others tried to alert her and say, “Minister, if you are really intent on ramming this through the House, at least put some real protections in for our young people.” But, no, none of that has been addressed, so the harm will continue for those people, and that’s unacceptable. I recently met with Dr Kelly Feng, who many people in this House know, from Asian Family Services. They are, in some ways, the last cab off the rank to get mental health funding, and it is not because they don’t do an outstanding job—they do. The problem is because they do not know what they do not know about their community. They cannot measure what is not coming through the medicalised door when it comes to gambling harm. Anecdotally, there is a huge amount of evidence and a picture of young Asian New Zealanders in particular with gambling problems, but because they do not go through doctors’ doors or access and Choice programmes, they are not counted. What is going to happen to that community, and how are people like Dr Kelly Feng, who is so committed to serving them, going to be able to provide the tools to be able to clean up the mess and the harm that this Government is proliferating through this unconscionable, immoral, and ill-thought-through bill that they are doing just for a tax grab? I implore the National Party to find your chops and think about the mental health aspects. Get your Minister to do some advocacy, because he has been completely missing in action, and join us in voting against this bill instead of throwing our young people under the bus. Hon MELISSA LEE (National) (12:07): Thank you very much, Mr Speaker. Listening to that speech actually shows that that member was not present during the select committee process. People listening to this debate will be under the impression, mistakenly, that online gambling doesn’t currently exist and that the harm isn’t actually happening. The statistics that were quoted by some members opposite, who talked about the harm that is already here and actually affecting our communities, are correct. The previous Government didn’t do anything for six years about this. It has been around for a while. It didn’t just all of a sudden appear, and we’re not introducing the harm. It already exists in our communities. It exists. This bill actually minimises that. What we’re trying to do is regulate, because otherwise it is out there already, we’re not collecting taxes from those businesses, and we don’t even know if they’re doing any harm minimisation work. They’re actually happening. This bill regulates, tries to provide harm minimisation work, and actually delivers to the communities who can benefit from the profits. Mr Speaker, I commend the bill to the House. GLEN BENNETT (Labour) (12:08): Kia ora, Mr Speaker. As I rise and have been listening throughout this debate, as many people have said, and the previous speaker, we’re talking about harm here. We’re talking about individuals. We’re talking about families. We’re talking about communities. I don’t know experiences that members in this Chamber have had when it comes to gambling hurt and harm, but I know in my own family, I have a family member who, unbeknownst to many of us, ended up, within their own home, in an online gambling addiction, which caused great harm—in fact, a relationship breakdown—because of the addiction and because of the allure and because of the in the shadows that online gambling creates. I also have one of my foster boys who got into the pokies a long time ago. As much as that is harmful—and it is—it was visible and it could be visually regulated, in terms of he was actually banned. He was on the register, and so he would go to the pokies and his photo was there and he wasn’t able to enter them. Sadly, again, because of challenges, he found the world of online casino gambling, and that addiction has continued. We’ve done work, and hopefully there’s a way through it, but it is a challenge. Yes, emotions are high; yes, people are passionate; yes, we must do something about this. But, again, it’s not just words in this Chamber; it’s not just words on the bill, which will become an Act. It’s actually about the lives of young people, the lives of old people, the lives of all cultures where it happens. Let us pause and remember that. As a Labour Party, yes, we are going to oppose this, and I want to thank our lead on this, my colleague Lemauga Sosene, who has led us well in terms of not only the select committee but talking us as a caucus through why we should be standing up and saying no. Yes, all the way through, it’s been “We must be doing something, we must be doing something”—we must find a way through—but, in many ways, there have been moments as this bill has traversed the House where it has seemed rushed at times. There were changes that were made at the committee of the whole House and that were made quite quickly. I’m not sure, because of those changes, if we should potentially slow things down and maybe take it back to select committee to unpack it a bit more. Yes, we must change it, but what is the point of changing it if we don’t get it right—if we come back into this House in a year or two and have to play around with it yet again because we haven’t got the settings right, and it actually isn’t helping people, and it isn’t helping the harm? We support regulation; we began regulation on this; and we must keep leaning in and figuring it out. Now, we’ve had conversations as well—and I heard a previous Government member speak about the fact of helping communities and putting money back into communities. The question is: at what cost do we do that? Community returns—yeah, they maybe potentially can come from the dividends from online gambling, but is that worth it when harm is done within communities and within families? I look at the submission from the Salvation Army; they ran the Oasis programme for problem gamblers—I think it was from the mid-1990s until about five or 10 years ago when the funding dried up for them and they weren’t able to provide that service. The service was so necessary because this is one of those addictions, one of those issues, like many, that crosses whether you’re well-to-do, whether you’re rich, whether you’re poor, whether you’re working class—it crosses through everything. The question for me is: is sustainable wellbeing, in terms of getting a bit more cash into the community, worth it when we cannot be building and dealing with problem gambling issues? We need to find good policy; we need to find a way through. This is not it, and we cannot in good faith support this bill. We oppose this bill. We suggest, potentially, why not take it back to select committee? Why not pull it apart again so we can get it right and ensure that people, that communities, that families who are struggling with online gambling will get the help and support they need? Dr HAMISH CAMPBELL (National—Ilam) (12:13): It is a great honour to rise in support of the Online Casino Gambling Bill in this third reading. Online gambling is in New Zealand; it is widely accessible on many devices, and currently, it is unregulated. It is surprising that the other side don’t actually want to support this bill. They talk about the harm; they did nothing, for six years, about dealing with the harm of online gambling. This is making sure that it’s a level playing field. Some of that money is going to go towards our community—[Interruption] Pity they weren’t so loud and getting up and talking during the last Parliament to actually do something. This is actually making sure that money can go towards our community organisations and we can help minimise the harm. Therefore, I commend this bill to the House. Hon JAN TINETTI (Labour) (12:14): It doesn’t matter what side of this debate we’re on, we all know, in this House, that the harm from gambling is hideous. We’ve heard today from people who have had firsthand experience; we’ve heard from people who maybe have had second-hand experience; but most of us can make a connection to someone or people who have had harm from gambling. It’s not really recognised alongside the other addictions that we hear about. My colleague Ingrid Leary kind of talked about that, and the way that we even vote upon that in this House. If we have a vote in this House on a bill that’s around alcohol, that usually goes as a conscience vote, but here we’re talking about just as horrific an addiction, in the form of gambling, and we’re not taking that same approach. It’s the same for our support people who help the people who suffer from addictions in society and in the community. They don’t get the same support that other people do—that other groups do. They don’t have the same sort of revenue that comes in to them. In fact, my colleague talked about Oasis and the good work that Salvation Army did through their Oasis programme. I think it was 31 years that they were delivering support for gambling harm. In fact, in 2024, their revenue dried up—so it wasn’t 10 years ago; it was only two years ago that their revenue dried up. We lost a great organisation that supported people. I’ve seen families drawn and pulled apart because of gambling; I’ve seen mums who are living in poverty and trying desperately to provide for their family who have got hooked into the gambling mode. I’ve seen them ripped apart from their families because of what gambling has done to them. It is absolutely hideous. Do you know what, I’ve heard from the other side—they’re saying that Labour wants to do nothing here, and that is not the case. We want to see regulation, but not regulation that potentially makes it more permissive, and that’s exactly what this bill does. It has the potential to make online gambling more permissive. Now, nobody is saying, as I’ve heard from the other side today, that online gambling doesn’t exist already. It is getting bigger and bigger all the time, but this bill has the potential for it to become even greater and more permissive. I want to spend my contribution here walking through how that is the case. I fear, from the debate that I have heard here today, that there is not a lot of understanding around what the potential hazards are in this bill. Firstly, I want to talk about the fact that we have no understanding from this bill of what the harm minimisation will be. We’re concerned that it leaves most of that harm minimisation to the Minister and to regulations. Now, if we’re talking about land-based gambling—and I’m going to talk about class 4, and that’s the pokies with the land-based gambling—there are responsibilities on the host of those machines. They are not perfect by any stretch of the imagination, but those responsibilities do exist. That is things like ensuring that they’re checking in on the gambler after a certain amount of time; that is ensuring that we haven’t got one person that’s stuck at a machine for hours and hours on end; that is ensuring that there is the right support there, going and having a conversation, and that there is not an ATM right beside where the gambling is happening. Those host responsibilities are about exclusion as well. The host has to exclude after a certain amount of time. Those host responsibilities happen for a reason: to ensure that our people are kept as safe as they possible can be. Now, how can you possibly do host responsibilities with online gambling? That’s a question that, when I was Minister of Internal Affairs, I asked myself over and over again. We didn’t have the technology to do that back in 2021. But, guess what, we have the technology, and it’s working in jurisdictions across the world now. That technology exists, through artificial intelligence, to have host responsibilities that would exclude gamblers right from the word go. The Minister knows about this, but the Minister has refused to put this into the bill, so we open up advertising, and we don’t have that technology that can exclude people that are over and over in repetitive gambling right at the start. The advertising’s there, luring them in all the time. That has the potential to be more permissive than what we’ve ever seen in the online space before. I say to the other side: be careful of the unintended consequences that you are putting in place today. That is why we are taking a stance to stand against this bill. Also, I want to talk about the number of licences. We’ve heard that here. I do believe in a licensing regime, but 15 licences for our population makes us as permissive as the UK, which is the most permissive gambling jurisdiction in the world. That’s what we’re doing today. We’re making it more permissive than ever, and we don’t have the moral obligation with it going to auction. I don’t disagree about how it’s being done, but I’m saying with that going to auction and being on the open market, there is a potential that we won’t have people from our local country or organisations from our local country being able to win at that auction. Therefore, that means no company that is involved in this could have the moral obligation back to our country. Let’s take one example of that: Skycity are a provider of online gambling who are offshore currently. They have their online site offshore because they can’t legally run it in New Zealand. They, potentially, might not be successful at that online auction, yet they have a moral obligation because they are a big company linked back to this country. We might not have them or any other New Zealand company involved in winning any of those online auctions. We could have companies that don’t give a damn about the moral fibre of this country winning at that auction. That’s what this bill does, and that’s the problem that we see with it. I want to see an online regime here. I want to see something that’s going to keep New Zealanders safe, but this bill has the potential to do exactly the opposite. To me, I can’t morally vote for it, because I have seen that damage. When I was up, once as Minister, in Whangārei, I walked through a library, and the library people were telling me about all of the wonderful free internet that they were providing with their computers. Every single one of those computers—all 15 of them—was on an online gambling site. I want to see protections, but this bill has the potential to go in the absolute opposite direction. It pains me that we don’t have something on the Table here today that is going to keep New Zealanders safe. That is what you are voting on today. The other side is voting on a bill that has the potential to do the exact opposite of what has been said. I am never going to be in a place where I am going to put New Zealanders and the people that I see that are unsafe in this area at harm any more. I am willing to work on a solution, and I am willing to sit down and come to something that is cross party in this area, because I think we owe it to New Zealanders. I also think we owe it to New Zealanders to have a broader discussion on the community funding. While I agree with what has happened overall, my heart says we need to look at how we can decouple that community funding and look at other ways, because it is completely immoral that we are propping up our brilliant community organisations on the back of such harm. We need to have that serious discussion, and I hope that we can be adult enough to have that in the next short while. It pains me, but I cannot support this bill. Dr CARLOS CHEUNG (National—Mt Roskill) (12:24): I am personally against gambling. I was told that enjoying gambling, drugs, alcohol, and smoking isn’t a path to a stable life in New Zealand. In my ideal world, we should ban any form of gambling, but we need to be realistic. Online gambling does exist. Online platforms are now making global gambling accessible at any moment, exposing more people to harm. This bill will not stop people from online gambling. However, it does take the necessary steps by closing those loopholes and bringing greater oversight to online gambling. Therefore, I commend this bill to the House. A party vote was called for on the question, That the Online Casino Gambling Bill be now read a third time. Ayes 68 New Zealand National 49; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8. Noes 54 New Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 14; Te Pāti Māori 5; Ferris. Motion agreed to. Bill read a third time. DANA KIRKPATRICK (National—East Coast) (12:26): Point of order, Mr Speaker. I might be mistaken, but I was pretty sure the Greens voted 14 votes, which would make it not 55 votes, but 54. Celia Wade-Brown: I did say 14. DANA KIRKPATRICK: I think it’s the calculation, Mr Speaker. It’s 54, not 55. ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Teanau Tuiono): OK. The Ayes are 68; the Noes are 54. The question is still agreed to. Fast maths over there. Congratulations!

Documents and supporting material