Timmy Dooley (Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

I thank the Minister of State for bringing the Bill to the House. Virtually everybody in society recognises the impact of problem gambling on the lives of individuals and their families and communities. It is also incumbent on us, when we try to deal with such a difficult thing, not to end up with unintended consequences of what we seek to do. I am mindful that in his opening remarks the Minister of State identified the threat from the Internet and the great difficulties we have as a society in trying to regulate sites outside the jurisdiction of Ireland or Europe and which are further afield.This may be cause for concern.

The Minister of State has indicated a willingness to look at some issues I wish to raise. Perhaps he can enlighten us further on that. The first issue I wish to raise is one that has been raised with me by a number of owners of horses, trainers and people involved in the point-to-point business, a strong element of which is in my county. Their concerns are the concerns that have been expressed by the racing channels. They believe from media coverage in recent weeks that Racing TV and Sky Sports Racing are seriously worried about their ability to continue broadcasting Irish race meetings to an Irish audience in light of the gambling advertising watershed ban, which is proposed within the regulation. Obviously, this is an issue that encompasses the two aforementioned channels along with RTÉ, TG4 and Virgin Media. They believe these represent key pillars in the ability to market the sport and, importantly, our bloodstock sector. They are seriously worried that if racing were to disappear from our television screens because it would be no longer commercially viable for those channels to broadcast here at home, they believe it would have a detrimental impact on the body at large regarding the Irish horse racing industry and would represent a terrible blow to their livelihoods and local economies. While they are mindful the channels concerned are largely behind paywalls, if somebody using an Internet site opts in or accepts the conditions set by just clicking "Yes", he or she has free access and it is not a competitive environment.

Will the Minister of State give some clarity on any of the amendments he might bring forward to give some comfort to those horse owners, breeders and others involved in the industry that the introduction of this Bill will not take Irish racing from our screens because of the relatively small scale of Irish racing by comparison with the British market and the inability to have two separate channels, one of which excludes betting as is set out in this Bill, as opposed to the situation in the UK? Has the Minister of State spoken to regulators in the UK about how we might work together, recognising that we share so much in common in our joint effort to promote that racing sector and the horse sector in general? It seems to me they are almost interoperable. We see horses being flown from Ireland to the UK every week and horses being flown here for race meetings. Surely we should be looking at this as a whole rather than in isolation if we are to ensure we protect the sector while, at the same time, protecting the most vulnerable, which we all recognise is important.

The simple game of bingo is under pressure as a result of the proposals the Minister of State is introducing and I would like him to address that. Again, while we recognise there is an issue in the gambling sector generally, by virtue of the way bingo operates for elderly people and people who are often alone, if certain limits are imposed as set out, it will have a very negative impact.

The Minister indicated he is bringing forward amendments and it is not until we see those amendments that we will be better able to understand. However, I am concerned the Bill overreaches as it relates to the Irish radio sector. On its current terms, the Bill may significantly limit the ability of broadcasters to run listener competitions. I understand this arises because listener competitions and other matters in which the Minister of State is interested are at risk of being captured under the very broad proposed definitions of "lottery" and "game" under the Bill. Listener competitions will be familiar to all of us. Listeners typically enter them via premium rate phone services, they have the opportunity to be selected to play, and they are able to win by answering a question on air. The existing definitions of "lottery" and "game" are perhaps too broad and, in their broad language, would seem to capture the Dublin city marathon as gambling as it is an activity engaged in by a person on the payment of money by the person and, in return for which, he or she obtains an opportunity to win a prize of money.The prize in the marathon seems to be €15,000 so it could be caught in that €10,000 limit. That may not be the case but that was what was reflected to me recently. If that is the case, obviously we would need to look at it.

These issues have also been raised with me by the GAA, the Federation of Irish Sport, Charities Institute Ireland and others which come under the ministerial ambit of the Minister of State. I will not expand here. Suffice to say that an alternative approach to the definitions of "lottery" and "game" needs to be adapted. Even the Minister of State's decision to change the limit to €10,000 will cause some difficulties for road races, charities and the GAA. If fundraising initiatives are to succeed, prizes need to be of a consequence.

It is counterintuitive if radio broadcasters are prevented from promoting radio bingo or other games of skill or luck during normal hours by the Bill just because the amount runs up. I cannot imagine that this is what the Minister of State intends. An exemption from the operation of the Bill for licensed radio broadcasters is appropriate because there is no cogent public policy basis for treating listener competitions conducted by licensed broadcasters as a form of gambling. Such competitions are already well regulated and there is no evidence of harm arising from the conduct of such competitions. They fund quality local journalism and entertainment.

Broadcasters are already subject to a wide range of existing regulation which contributes to the fair and transparent conduct of competitions by them. Such regulation includes regulation by ComReg and Coimisiún na Meán, the imposition of mandatory spend caps for the industry, self-regulation by the Advertising Standards Authority for Ireland and generous consumer protection regulation. In addition to those consumer protections, broadcasters typically self-impose mechanisms to ensure fairness and transparency, for example, by voluntarily setting spending caps below the mandatory caps and utilising third-party winner selection software. In light of the extensive regulation I have described, requiring the media sector to contribute to the funding of yet another regulator would add to the financial insecurity of broadcasters and contribute to the perception of unevenness in the treatment of the radio sector.

I would like to comment on the absence of evidence of harm. The purposes of the Bill have been described as addressing uncontrolled gambling and problem gambling, protecting children and licensing competitions which are neither uncontrolled nor problematic and from which children are excluded in the first instance. Industry experience with listener competitions is that they generate almost no consumer complaints. The UK provides a useful case study where there is good data available. The evidence provided by the Phone-paid Services Authority, which regulates premium-rate telephony in the UK, shows that while broadcasters are the largest users of premium-rate services, the sector has generated no complaints in the past five years. Similarly, industry experience shows low consumer spend associated with consumer competitions. I am told that there is an average spend per listener of approximately €4.27 per month. The capacity of consumers to bar or to stop premium-rate services on their phones further contributes to the absence of consumer harm.

There is also no evidence of harm for children. First, children are excluded from such competitions. Second, industry experience is that there are almost no complaints regarding children entering listener competitions. Third, listener data suggest that children represent a very small proportion of radio listenership. Finally, most people who provide a phone to a child block premium-rate services on that phone to prevent inappropriate spending. Listener competitions allow consumers to actively engage with and participate in broadcast shows rather than passively consuming their content. They enable two-way communication, fostering a more engaging and personalised experience. Moreover, listener competitions provide a vital source of income for broadcasters that is needed to maintain current services. Unlike gambling, broadcasters play an indispensable role in society and their funding needs to be protected in this area.

I wish to raise a further issue which is not addressed by the proposed Bill. It relates to the operation of the watershed provision, which will limit the time during which gambling advertising can run on radio. I suggest that this limitation is overboard in that it takes a regime that was developed to address the broadcast television sector and applies it to media more generally. The Bill is intended to act as a public health measure. The way in which it will operate is not consistent with how alcohol is dealt with in the broadcast sector under the various pieces of public health legislation relating to alcohol. The Bill requires an amendment to effectively exempt licensed radio broadcasters from the requirement to hold a gambling licence to conduct an activity that will constitute a game or a lottery, where the activity is conducted in connection with their editorial broadcast activities.The Minister of State might allude to that in his response. He might also explain how he plans to get around the competition authority’s issue, which is that the Exchequer and others will compensate RTÉ for loss of funding but will not compensate the rest of the broadcasting sector. It might be useful to get the Minister of State’s thoughts on that.

In conclusion, there are a number of outstanding issues that I would like the Minister of State to address: first, the bingo situation, which I have raised; second, the radio sector and the impact it might have on its operations; and, importantly, the impact this Bill, if passed in its current form, might have on our horse racing sector. I do not need to lecture the Minister of State because he is well aware from his own county. I know he is familiar with the economic impact of horse breeding, horse training and horse racing. It is the same in many counties, particularly throughout Leinster and Munster.

Of course, we all need to address problem gambling, but we need to do so in a manner that does not throw the baby out with the bath water, has a significant impact on harmful gambling and on the lives of young people while, at the same time, maintaining an industry and sector in a manner that is appropriate to their communities.