Maureen O'Sullivan (Dublin Central, Independent) | Oireachtas source

I read a report done by one of our betting companies on its contribution to the economy. Points made in the summary were that it contributed more than €70 million to the economy, it supported 900 jobs, it sponsored a number of sporting events and it paid commercial rates and water charges to local authorities. One could certainly say it made a positive contribution.

The Betting (Amendment) Bill 2013 is mainly about licensing and it takes into account the new development of online gambling. It is also about the conduct of bookmaking and bookmaking related operations. I suppose it is very much in keeping with the times in which we live because of social media and the increase of betting and gambling online. The positive parts are about compliance and non-compliance and those who may act as bookmakers and those who are not licensed to do so. Significant fines are outlined but time will tell whether they will be enough of a deterrent. There is a comprehensive section about applying for the licence, in particular for these new remote licences. There is much in the Bill which is positive and with which I could not disagree.

I note the prohibition on online betting for those under 18 years of age, which is much more of a grey area. I am not too sure that the way to prohibit and monitor it is strong enough in this Bill, although I know another Bill is being prepared. If all remote betting companies comply with the terms, there will be additional revenue raised but where will it go?

We know betting revenue goes to Horseracing Ireland and Bord na gCon to develop the horseracing and the greyhound industries. I have had quite a number of debates with the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine and the Minister for Arts, Heritage and the Gaeltacht about the greyhound industry, in particular in regard to coursing. I do not want to take from people who have greyhounds and treat them in a very fair way but we know there are abuses within the greyhound industry and yet the Government continues to fund it. We know a significant number of greyhounds are put down and are abused because they do not make the cut on the race track. We also know the Irish Coursing Club is not active enough in trying to prevent coursing meetings taking place in really adverse weather conditions and there are appalling injuries to greyhounds and, in particular, to hares at those events.

I agree with the level playing field for bookmakers because some have been at a disadvantage. I was a bit bemused by section 12(h)(ii) which states: "conducted the business of bookmaking in a disorderly manner or in such a manner as to cause or encourage persons to congregate and loiter in or outside the premises where the business was conducted or had permitted persons to loiter in those premises,". That is a bit unrealistic when it comes to the betting industry and bookies' shops because the whole nature of what happens in them is that there will be a certain amount of loitering.

The explanatory memorandum seems very comprehensive. It claims the aim of the Bill is fair and equal treatment. It is good that it notes there is a role to prevent crime and protect consumers against fraud and that this regulation could lead to that. I listened to a number of contributions and quite a number of them referred to gambling addiction. It is interesting, and probably ironic, that at this point in time, the Minister of State at the Department of Health with responsibility for addiction and the drugs issue is hosting a seminar in Dublin Castle at which there will be a number of speakers and inputs on the whole area of drug and alcohol addiction. The alcohol issue is being brought into the drugs strategy and the various drugs task forces will include alcohol.

Those who work in addiction and those affected by addiction, whether they are addicted or their loved ones are addicted, will all testify to the increase in the number of those presenting with a gambling addiction. It is really important when we discuss this Bill that we do not minimise the very serious and often tragic consequences for those with a gambling addiction. We can generally identify 95% of those with drug and alcohol addictions because there are visible signs of that addiction but we do not see that with gambling. We will see the physical signs on the person who abuses drugs or alcohol at some point. The body will not have any more veins for those injecting and the physical effects of alcohol abuse will be manifest and we will see an increase with those presenting with liver illness and in the development of cirrhosis. There is a physical limit when it comes to those addictions but there is no physical limits on the gambler who can go on and on because his or her body can take all of the gambling abuse in a way which those who are drug or alcohol addicted cannot.

There is an online gambling company in another jurisdiction, and I hope it does not set up here. It keeps an eye on those who are gambling online. When they reach a debt of approximately €1,000 or £1,000 sterling, it then makes an offer immediately of €100 or £100 sterling of free bets to increase the addiction and the amount owed.

I tabled a number of parliamentary questions to the Minister for Justice and Equality on the whole area of gambling addiction. I asked if he would support a national impact study. The answer was a bit strange because he said he did not have access to information to support suggestions of an increase in the number of person addicted to gambling. That indicates the need for an impact study to gauge the exact numbers involved. If one talks to people in any of the rehabilitation centres or in any of the counselling centres, they will tell one, as they have told me, that there is an increase in the number of those with gambling addictions appealing to them for rehabilitation and counselling. People are losing their homes due to mortgage arrears but people are also losing their homes due to the gambling addiction of a person in the family. This Bill, however, is not doing anything in that regard.

I acknowledge the ordinary gambler who knows his or her limit and who places a few bets daily or weekly. I know how enjoyable a day at the races can be and the excitement around the time of the grand national. I fully accept the role of personal responsibility but there are aspects to the gambling industry which are unsavoury such as the one I mentioned earlier.

I refer to fixed odd betting terminals, FOBTs. We do not have them here yet but it is worth flagging them as something of which to be aware. They are gambling machines and are like slot machines but they do not have a limit on what somebody can bet. They are not legal here, although they are in other jurisdictions. The statistic is that €100 or £100 sterling can be lost in the space of less than 20 seconds. If one multiples that by the number of seconds in one minute, one will see how much somebody can lose.

The Bill provides for the closure of premises on Christmas Day and Good Friday. I cannot agree with Deputy Lawlor who would like to see horseracing and bookies open on Good Friday. I wonder about the times from 7 a.m. to 10 p.m. There are issues for the staff who work very anti-social hours, including Saturdays, Sundays, late nights and bank holidays. To my knowledge, in some companies, there is no increase in the rate of pay for those anti-social hours as they are included generally in people's hours.

There is another move in England, which I want to highlight so that we do not go down that road, where English betting establishments can apply to the local authority to extend opening hours to midnight at weekends. That is a very cynical abuse of people who are having a drink and are much more vulnerable and much more likely to do something stupid in regard to gambling, whether online or in the bookies shop, if it is open and accessible.

I agree there should be a level playing field for bookmakers who have been at a disadvantage due to the competition from online bookmakers. However, enforcement is critical. The Department of Justice and Equality is preparing a gambling control Bill, which will ensure fairness in the conduct of gambling but I do not know if the words "fairness" and "gambling" go together as it sounds like a bit of a contradiction.

There is a need to protect vulnerable people, such as those who are under age and those who have an addiction. There is something odd about asking an industry - the gambling industry or the drinks industry - to fund efforts to deal with the difficulties and problems that arise from the activities of that industry. I agree with it, but I think it is something of a contradiction. We know that gambling can attract illegal criminal activity. I hope the next Bill will tackle that in a comprehensive way.

We have seen an increase in the number of casinos. It is frightening to listen to people in their late teens or early 20s speaking about going out for a few drinks to a pub or a club. It seems that they often go to casinos as part of their night out. I do not think we are looking at the accessibility and availability of such facilities. In itself, the Bill can be accepted. It has been welcomed by the bookmaking industry. I am waiting to see the next Bill because I think it needs to go much further.

See this speech in context