Seanad debates
Wednesday, 2 October 2024
Gambling Regulation Bill 2022: Committee Stage (Resumed)
10:30 am
Barry Ward (Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source
I will speak to amendment No. 149 and, in so doing, remark on how great minds think alike. I am very touched by Senator Dooley's amendment No. 148, which bears a striking resemblance to my own. I suspect the same people were in contact with us about it. I have heard what the Minister of State has to say and I entirely accept it. Regarding the impetus behind this amendment, the thrust of this whole Bill is to deal with problem gambling and gambling that is unregulated and does not provide any benefit to the wider community. It seeks to control gambling in a way that allows it to take place for those who can enjoy it responsibly and to allow benefits to the community and the operation of commercial outfits where they do not cause harm. The reason I acceded to put this amendment down is that there are competitions, essentially gambling, in broadcast media that demonstrably do no harm. I therefore feel they come under a different category from the majority of the provisions of the Bill.
The Minister of State has quite correctly said that it is incongruous because it would allow absolutely unfettered gambling. He said it would be unregulated but I am not suggesting it would be as the regulator would still have sway over it. It would be unrestricted, however. He said that would fly in the face of the fact that there are restrictions on charities and philanthropic organisations. That is a valid criticism of the amendment. I would say two things to that, however.
The first is that, in circumstances where it is demonstrable that harm does not arise from these games, there is a basis for allowing them to exist. The legislation as currently drafted will essentially wipe them out. That might not seem to be a cause for concern given that they are money makers for the stations involved but it is important to bear in mind that these restrictions apply equally to large broadcast media and small local radio stations. We know there are difficulties in the operating environment for local radio and local media at the moment. We should be doing what we can to support them. If they can run a gambling product on air that demonstrably does not cause any harm but which supports their bottom line, allowing them to continue to operate their services at a local level, that should be facilitated. It is potentially an important boost to the revenue and income of such stations. I do not see the problem with it.
The second point the Minister of State makes is that it would not be fettered in any way. That is a fair criticism. If we were to include a fetter, a restriction or a requirement to get the leave of the Minister to run such competitions or to have the details of the competition approved by the regulator, would the Minister of State then accept that the principle behind the thing is sound? It includes a specific distinction. It only applies to broadcast media and these games would still be regulated by the gambling regulator. It should also be remembered that broadcast media are already highly regulated. It is not the case that we are trying to create a mini wild west within the scheme. There is room for this. The Minister of State makes the valid criticism that activity is not restricted given the way the amendment has been drafted but will he accept that the principle is sound and that we therefore might be able to put in place restrictions or further elements within the proposed section to make it workable, even as part of the regulated scheme created by the Bill?
No comments