The Department of Internal Affairs

Te Tari Taiwhenua | Department of Internal Affairs

Building a safe, prosperous and respected nation


Resource material › Information We Provide › Gambits - September 2013

Return to the Gambits home page

Gambits: The reform issue

by Debbie Despard, Director Gambling Compliance

Gambling has been squarely in the spotlight in recent times, with over 35,000 submissions to the Flavell Bill. It is evident that NZ has strong views about it.

This has helped to get political change on the agenda and in this issue you will find important information about the changes and how you can have your say.

With these changing times though, some things need to stay the same. Our expectations of a sector that operates with integrity, prevents and minimises harm and works towards the best outcomes for New Zealand will continue. To this end we will continue to work with you to achieve good results and assist you to comply. We think there has been good progress made, and that regulatory relationships with most are stronger and more productive than they have been.

The regional forums held in September were an example of this progress. Along with the high turnout it was pleasing to see the willingness of attendees to engage on a range of topics relevant to the sector. I value these opportunities to meet face-to-face, as it increases our appreciation of the challenges that exist while allowing for constructive conversations to be held about how we can achieve positive gambling outcomes.

This sets a good foundation for the future of the gambling industry, and I look forward to working with you to ensure that the gambling sector operates at its best, and public confidence is restored.

Back to top

Public consultation on pokie reform proposals

Internal Affairs Minister Chris Tremain has released a public consultation document on proposals to improve four areas in the non-casino Class 4 gambling sector.

The proposals are aimed at:
  • increasing the transparency of Class 4 grant-making decisions
  • increasing the minimum rate of return to the community
  • increasing the proportion of proceeds returned to the communities that generated them
  • reducing the compliance costs for Class 4 operators.
“There is a large amount of public interest in Class 4 gambling and I welcome feed- back on the proposed regulatory changes. These four reforms are part of a wider package of proposals previously agreed to,” Mr Tremain said.

“In addition to these reforms, there is also work under way to assess the most cost effective harm minimisation measures that could be introduced through regulation-making powers. I also intend to introduce further legislative changes in a number of areas. This will enable the auditing of management companies that provide services to gaming societies, allow longer licences to be issued as an incentive to compliant societies and enable grant information to be published online rather than in a newspaper. There will also be improvements to help prevent conflicts of interest and ‘rorts’ of the system.”

The consultation document focuses on proposed regulatory changes and discusses and analyses the four issues involved

The Department released the Venue Costs Resubmission Final Report at the same time as the consultation document. This report provides an analysis of Venue Cost Schedules submitted to the Department from September 2010 to June 2012. It provides information on the costs incurred by over 1000 venues hosting gaming machines and is a useful resource for those who wish to make a submission on the consultation document.

The consultation period runs until 25 October 2013 and submissions can be emailed to:

Both documents are available on the Department’s website:

Back to top

What’s in the consultation document?

The consultation document considers four issues for improving the Class 4 gambling framework:

Increasing transparency

The policy objective is to increase the transparency of the grant-making decisions that Class 4 societies’ net proceeds committees make. The consultation document proposes publishing information on societies’ websites about, for example, the purpose of the grant, the geographic location of grant recipients and whether a grant applicant is a local, regional or national organisation. Information of this nature could assist the public in assessing trends in grant decision-making and in the development of policy advice.

Increasing the proportion of proceeds returned to the community

The consultation document discusses several options to increase the minimum rate of return in order to deliver increased financial benefits to the community. The current rate of return is 37.12 per cent of GST-exclusive gross proceeds. This is the minimum proportion of funds that must be returned back to the community through grants. Rates of between 40 and 43 per cent are discussed in the consultation document and include stepped increases over a number of years or one-off increases.

Localised return

This issue arises from the new regulation-making power contained within the Gambling (Gambling Harm Reduction) Amendment Act, which took effect on 14 September 2013. The policy objective is to ensure that the potential harm that can come from gambling within a particular area is balanced by the benefit of returning a commensurate level of proceeds. The consultation document discusses potential definitions of what amounts to “local” distribution (including territorial authority district and region) and some potential options for localised funding and for rates of return to communities.

Proposals to amend the venue costs payment system

The policy objective is to ensure that the money available to be returned to community purposes is maximised by developing a more efficient and effective venue compensation model that reduces compliance costs for venues, societies and the Department of Internal Affairs. Current limits on potential payments were set in a Gazette notice in 2004 and updated in 2008 to reflect that they were GST exclusive. This consultation looks at an updated status quo, a per-machine payment option and a commission-based payment system, as options for change. There is no intention to increase the proportion of payments made by societies above the current limit of 16 per cent.

Tell us what you think

The consultation period runs until 25 October 2013. For more information on this consultation, including a downloadable version of the consultation document, visit the Department of Internal Affairs’ website:

The Department wants to hear from you if you have ideas or opinions on the topics discussed in the consultation paper, or if you can provide information or insight into the impacts that the proposals might make. Email submissions to:

Back to top

New law allows for venue re-locations

Now that the Gambling Harm Amendment Act is law, venues can re-locate within their district and retain 18 machines in some circumstances.

The background:

New Zealand communities are understandably interested in where gambling venues are located. There has been widespread concern about venues in poor areas, a notable case being the ‘Galaxy bar’ in South Auckland, which had its licence cancelled by the Department in September 2012 because the venue was used mainly for the purposes of operating gaming machines.

Changes to the law as a result of the Gambling Harm Amendment Act will help territorial authorities (TAs) manage the concentration of venues in highly deprived areas.

The new law allows venues to relocate, and to retain the number of machines that are already licensed to operate. So an 18-machine venue on the move can retain its 18 machines, if the relocation is consented to and agreed.

What you need to know:

When a venue re-location is being considered it must have the agreement of the venue, society and TA. TAs will need to consent to the move, and can do so providing they have either developed a relocation policy, or have an existing one.

TAs must consider the social impact of gambling in high deprivation communities when setting their relocation policies from now on.

Back to top

Venue Costs Resubmission Exercise Report released

The final report on the Venue Costs Resubmission Exercise has been released and is available on the Department of Internal Affairs’ website:

In late 2010, the Department introduced a new standard form for Class 4 societies to use when submitting a Venue Costs Schedule as part of a Venue Agreement for approval by the Secretary for Internal Affairs. Societies were then asked to resubmit all Venue Costs Schedules to the Secretary for re-approval. The data collection process was completed in the middle of 2012, and a report on the analysis of the impacts of venue costs has now been released.

The report provides a range of information on the combined total of venue costs and identifies the effect of the Gazette Notice: Limits and Exclusions on Class 4 Venue Costs on the sector.

There are four Limits in the Gazette Notice: Limit A is for hourly costs and is 60 cents per hour per machine; Limit B is for weekly costs and is $75 per week per machine; Limit C is for venue expenses and is $800 per week; while Limit D applies at the society level and restricts the total paid to all venues to 16 per cent of yearly GMP (excluding GST).

The report provides a range of information on venue costs at an aggregate level and identifies the effect of the Gazette Notice: Limits and Exclusions on Class 4 Venue Costs on the sector.

Analysis of data from the Venue Costs Resubmission Project suggests:
  • Limit A may be a real constraint for some venues, especially where wage costs are high. This is likely to be particularly noticeable for venues in rural areas with a small number of gaming machines and low gaming machine proceeds (GMP).
  • Rents and associated insurance and security costs may be a factor contributing to some venues exceeding their Limit B. This is likely to be particularly noticeable with venues in main urban areas.
  • Only a small proportion of venues in main urban areas with both high GMP (but not the highest GMP) and high labour costs are affected by Limit C.
Labour costs and management fees were identified in the analysis as representing major pressure points for those venues which are in excess of the Limits.

The data collected did not include any information about Limit D, so this was estimated using two indicators - costs claimed under the venue costs schedules submitted, and the maximum amount payable to each venue after limits A, B and C were applied. We found that in many cases both the costs claimed and the maximum amount payable exceeded 16 per cent of GMP. This tells us that some societies have been constrained by Limit D which limits the total amount payable to all venues in a society to 16 per cent of total GMP. As a result, many venues have not received the full amount of their payable costs for hosting the gaming machines.

The information in the report will be very useful for venue owners and societies wishing to make a submission on the consultation document Gambling Act 2003: Public consultation on four Class 4 gambling proposals.

Back to top

Running a prize draw? It just became simpler

Spot prize draws have been exempted from the definition of gambling under regulations which took effect on 30 September 2013. To be eligible for the exemption the draws must meet some conditions.

Under the Gambling (Non-gambling Activities) Regulations 2013 both commercial and non-commercial organisations can offer spot prize draws provided their events benefit the community.

Conditions to be met include:
  • the prize draw is secondary or incidental to a primary event
  • entry is available only to those who purchase a ticket or pay to participate in the primary event
  • the primary event benefits the community (for example, either through community attendance and participation, or through proceeds being raised for the community or a charity)
  • the primary event cannot be gambling as defined in the Act but could be, for example, a sporting or fishing competition, cultural event, fashion show or home and lifestyle show
  • results are determined wholly or partly by chance, must not involve a gaming machine and must be determined within one week of the end of the primary event
  • the prizes do not include prohibited property such as firearms, liquor, tobacco.
The changes will reduce the burden that groups running events faced complying with ‘red tape’.

Back to top

Grant funding - understanding the impact on communities

How easy is it for societies to distribute grants back to the region where gaming machine proceeds were raised? What challenges do grant applicants face in applying for Class 4 funding? And how do communities feel about Class 4 funding?

Answers to these and other questions are being sought through a study of the Class 4 funding environment in the Manukau Ward and the Manurewa Local Board.

The Department’s Sector Initiatives team is gathering information from community and charity groups, as well as societies, to gain an insight into the region’s funding environment. It will also help identify any opportunities to increase funding returns and highlight some of the positive impacts that Class 4 funding is having for community groups in the Manukau Ward and Manurewa Local Board.

During July and August Sector Initiatives met with and surveyed community and charity groups about their experiences in applying for pokie grants. Over 250 survey responses were received and the team is currently analysing the information provided.

Class 4 societies are also being approached about their funding models and experiences in returning grants to the Manukau Ward and Manurewa Local Board, ensuring that the Department takes a holistic approach in examining regional returns. Sector Initiatives will soon invite societies with venues in the area to discuss their experiences in localising returns by holding a couple of workshops in October.

Sector Initiatives Manager Stefan Pishief said the team has been encouraged by the level of interest around the regional return of grants, and the willingness of parties to share their thoughts on the matter.

“We believe this examination of the Manukau Ward and Manurewa Local Board is timely given the consultation on localised returns that is taking place as part of the Minister’s package for regulatory reform,” Stefan said.

The team will also look to publicise examples of grant making that has really benefited communities in these areas.

Back to top

Introducing Natasha Firth

Natasha Firth, formerly a senior policy advisor in Gambling Compliance’s Operational Policy team has been appointed Manager Licensing Compliance. She replaces John Currie who moved to the Department’s Charities Services as Manager Registration.

Natasha is excited about her new role: “I have the unique opportunity to lead the Licensing Compliance team as we develop new ways of working, as anticipated by last year’s service delivery review. This includes the development and implementation of a new licensing compliance operating model that will see the team acting as a more effective gateway to ensure the suitability of those entering, and continuing to operate, in the gambling sector.

“I am already impressed by the talent within the team, and the support I have received from the Auckland and Wellington staff and Team Leaders. The team is currently focused on the implementation of the first phase of the Integrated Gambling Platform. Their hard work will ultimately benefit the entire Gambling Compliance Group and help to ensure a robust system for future use directly by societies.

“Since I took up my role I have become aware of the positive feedback both the Wellington and Auckland teams have received from the sector. The team has been commended for its responsiveness and willingness to assist on a day-to-day basis. A number of societies have also said they appreciate the ability to meet and discuss issues and concerns face-to-face, allowing for a clear understanding of expectations and points of view. I am keen to promote and support strong relationships in future.”

Back to top

Navigating ARN - a guide to signs and displays

Much has been written, debated and challenged about actual, reasonable and necessary (ARN) costs. The leading Gambling Commission case on defining ARN is set out in GC10/10, and details the steps that societies must take when considering whether expenditure should be incurred.

The Gambling Compliance team has noticed an increase in investment on displays and signs at venues. While signs and displays can be an effective way of informing the public, care must be taken when determining what should be spent on them. As with all society costs, it is expected that a ‘line-by-line’ assessment will be carried out that evaluates whether the purchase is reasonable and necessary for conducting gambling or legal compliance. Any purchase made reduces the amount of funding available to the community, which is a serious consideration for societies. Here are some tips to help you navigate this area.

What signage is reasonable?

An exterior sign that advertises gambling facilities at a venue would be considered part of the gaming infrastructure and therefore a society cost. Examples include a sandwich board (or more than one if there are two street frontages), or a removable sign attached to the building. Internal signs at venues located in the immediate vicinity of the gambling area, focused on what the society must legally notify, are necessary costs. Examples include the display of the Class 4 venue licence, important information such as how to apply for grants, gaming machine rules and where to go to seek help for problem gambling.

What’s reasonable for jackpot displays?

With the advent of multiscreen displays and displays outside the gaming area, it is timely to remember that the requirement for jackpot operation is solely for a display showing jackpot details to be readily and easily visible to just those players playing a gaming machine connected to a jackpot. It is expected that jackpot displays would be available only in Gaming rooms.

Back to top

Sports funding - How to avoid the pitfalls

Gaming machine grant funding has been in the headlines recently, with a series of articles about sports funding, published in the NZ Herald in late August. Around 44 per cent of grants from gaming machine proceeds is received by sporting organisations.

While sports funding has helped many amateur teams and individuals to participate in events to build skills, enhance health and fitness, and to enjoy the many benefits of sport, sports grants need to be handled with care.

Who can receive funding?

Only teams or individuals that are deemed ‘amateur’ can receive grants. It is important to understand the nature of the event or competition, as well as the team itself – factors such as the need to understand what payments are ordinarily received by the applicant. So, for example, if a sportsperson is usually paid a wage or a fee, or is reimbursed for a salary, then they will not be eligible for a gaming machine grant.

Note too that the club or team that applies for the grant must be affiliated or aligned to a national body and the activity needs to be played regularly as part of a significant competition.

What can they receive funding for?

Funding can be approved for amateur teams’ playing uniforms, team travel, and training costs. It is expected that the club or team would retain ownership of the uniforms. Funding can also be approved in relation to modest non-cash prizes or trophies, but not large cash or non-cash prizes.

Grants can be used to reimburse amateur players for reasonable and necessary travel expenses. Clubs cannot pay salary or match payments to players or reimburse players’ lost salaries or wages.

The fact that one or two professional players join an amateur team for a few games in a competition will not necessarily mean that the entire team is ineligible for a grant; however, those professionals can receive only the limited expenses that are paid to the amateur players.

Club expenses

The club may pay reasonable expenses for short-term coaching for amateur teams. Other amateur team-related expenses, such as ground maintenance, administration or affiliation fees paid to national sports bodies are also allowed.

Contracted players and representative selection

Some amateur players may be contracted with a national sporting organisation or with their own club. Again that does not prohibit the player from receiving funding, as long as the club or body contributes only to the player’s actual and necessary expenses such as travel and accommodation, and not for lost earnings or a salary.

Similarly where a national or representative team is concerned, the players will remain eligible for funding as long as the organising body pays or reimburses only the expenses relating to the tour such as accommodation, travel, insurance or medical costs.

Sports funding assurance

Societies must be aware of the purpose of the grant, which can be more complex when an organisation conducts both professional and amateur sport. Societies are well aware of their responsibilities to audit grants, and as such we would expect them to work with grant recipients to ensure that there is an auditable process by which it can be verified that funding was attributed entirely to amateur sport. Where funding has been provided for amateur facilities there must be a transparent market arrangement for professionals to use them as well. Public and media perception of the possible funding of professional sport places a greater level of reliance on societies to ensure that their audit procedures are clear and transparent.

Back to top

AML team helps ethnic businesses

The Department is working to help ethnic businesses comply with the Anti-Money Laundering and Countering Financing of Terrorism Act.

Through its Financial Integrity Unit (FIU) Internal Affairs supervises a range of businesses not covered by the Reserve Bank and the Financial Markets Authority including casinos, non-deposit taking lenders, money changers and money remitters.

The FIU, supported by the Office of Ethnic Affairs, is identifying ethnic businesses under Internal Affairs’ supervision and assessing whether cultural or language barriers may hinder them from meeting their statutory obligations.

A project team is contacting the relevant ethnic communities to identify and address their needs and find appropriate community members to help convey DIA’s message, so that they will be able to comply with the new requirements.

Regulatory Services General Manager, Maarten Quivooy, said the project is a good example of a community approach to regulatory work to achieve maximum benefit from complying with the law and minimise potential harm to community relations.

Back to top

Casino Host Responsibility Programme reviewed

The Gambling Commission has reviewed SkyCity Auckland Casino’s Host Responsibility Programme and Problem Gambler Identification Policy (the HRP). After several rounds of consultation and input from the Department, Ministry of Health, casino operators and problem gambling service providers the Commission released the adjusted HRP. Dr Paul Delfabbro, Associate Professor at the School of Psychology, University of Adelaide provided expert advice to the Commission on the HRP review.

Casinos must have an HRP according to the terms of their casino Operator’s licence. The purpose of the HRP is to set out how the casino must manage its obligations to prevent and minimise gambling harm. The policy includes the type of problem gambling information that must be provided, information on exclusion processes, the provision of staff training, environmental design, responsible marketing and advertising, and the responsible service of alcohol, among other things.

The HRP also includes the casino’s policy on identifying problem gamblers. This sets out a range of indicators for identifying potential problem gamblers such as intensity and frequency of play, visible distress, repeated ATM visits, and/or having insufficient money to exit the car park. The HRP also sets out what SkyCity must do when staff observe the indicators.

Under the revised HRP a new three-month exclusion option is available, and patrons breaching limits on SkyCity’s voluntary pre-commitment system is a new general indicator of potential problem gambling. The HRP can be found at:

Back to top

Hamilton Casino cheats sentenced

Two people found guilty of cheating Hamilton’s SkyCity Casino were sentenced in the Hamilton District Court.

Zhou ZHAO, 32, a New Zealand resident, received five months’ home detention and was ordered to pay reparation of $13,000. Xiao Dong LU, 28, a non-resident, was ordered to pay $4000 reparation and undertake 350 hours’ community work. Judge Philip Connell recognised she would be deported before serving her sentence. Each was found guilty in May on charges of deception stemming from the pair working in collusion with a rapid roulette table game dealer to defraud the casino of $52,000.

Lu approached Hamilton City Casino dealer Bo Du in 2011 and reached an agreement that Du would influence the game when she or her partner, Zhao, appeared in the casino. Du had allowed her two accomplices to place bets after the roulette ball had dropped into the winning number slot and circumvented the electronic cut-off for final bets by deliberately releasing the ball early, removing the element of chance and causing the casino to incur substantial losses.

The Department was called in after the casino discovered irregularities with the rapid roulette game. The dealer, Bo Du, 33, was sentenced in January 2013 to nine months’ home detention and reparation of $20,000.

Back to top

Theft of pokie money results in convictions

Two convictions were entered recently for theft of gambling machine proceeds in 2012 that should have been distributed back to the community via grants.

Former venue operator of the Counties Inn, Pukekohe, Martin Clyve Lamplough, 64, pleaded guilty to stealing gaming machine money when he failed to bank a week’s gaming machine take of $27,015.60 in May.

Former manager of the Legends Sports Bar, Whangarei, Michael William Laiman, 53, was convicted of one charge of theft by a person in a special relationship for failing to bank the week’s gaming machine proceeds of $3433.22 into the Lion Foundation’s bank account in April. He pleaded not guilty.

Both Lamplough and Laiman told the Department they had used the pokie money to pay bills, breaking their respective venue agreements with New Zealand Community Trust and Lion Foundation.

Lamplough was warned several times in 2011 and 2012 for late banking of gaming machine money and was also issued with a $2500 infringement notice. He will be sentenced in the Pukekohe District Court on 23 October. Laiman was fined $1000.

Internal Affairs’ Regulatory Services General Manager, Maarten Quivooy, said pokie proceeds do not belong to the venue operator or the gambling trust that owns the gaming machines.

“They hold the money in trust for distribution to the community. Stealing pokie money is actually taking money away from the organisations that support our communities. We monitor all gaming machines in pubs and clubs to ensure that takings are properly accounted for and we are pleased that we have been able to hold these individuals accountable under the law,” Maarten Quivooy said.

Lamplough’s company has since gone into receivership, and Legends Sports Bar was placed in voluntary liquidation.

Back to top

Pokie numbers and expenditure down

Pub and club gaming machine expenditure in the year ended June 2013 fell 3 per cent from $854 million to $826.3 million.

There were also fewer licence holders, gambling venues and gaming machines compared with 12 months earlier.

Graph data shows: 2000 - $450m; 2001 - $597m; 2002 - $777m; 2003 - $941m; 2004 - $1035m; 2005 - $1027m; 2006 - $906m; 2007 - $950m; 2008 - $938.3m; 2009 - $889m; 2010 - $849.2m; 2011 - $856m; 2012 - $854m; 2013 - $826m.

View a large version of this graph

Spending rose between the first and second quarters of 2013, from $192.7 million at the end of March to $206.1 million at 30 June 2013.

Graph data shows: Jun 07 - $237.7m; Sep 07 - $243.5m; Dec 07 - $245.3m; Mar 08 - $218.5m; Jun 08 - $231m; Sep 08 - $232.3m; Dec 08 - $230.7m; Mar 09 - $208.7m; Jun 09 - $217.3m; Sep 09 - $220.7m; Dec 09 - $218.8m; Mar 10 - $199.9m; Jun 10 - $209.8m; Sep 10 - $215.2m; Dec 10 - $215.8m; Mar 11 - $205.1m; Jun 11 - $219.9m; Sep 11 - $221.4m; Dec 11 - $220.4m; Mar 12 - $203.7m; Jun 12 - $208.5m; Sep 12 - $221.4m; Dec 12 - $220.4m; Mar 13 - $203.7m; Jun 13 - $208.5m.

View a large version of this graph

The Department tracks and monitors non-casino operations and captures spending through electronic monitoring (EMS), ensuring the integrity of games and the accurate accounting of money. The EMS became fully operational in March 2007.

Non-casino gaming machine spending by society type (April - June 2013)

Society TypeTotal GMP Quarter% Of Total
Sports Clubs4,022,781.332.0%
Chartered Clubs16,412,207.198.2%
Total Club27,407,145.8613.3%
Total All206,059,747.30100.0%

Licensed gambling operations in pubs and clubs

DateLicensed HoldersVenuesGaming Machines
30 June 2013351135617,534
31 Mar 2013353136717,542
31 December 2012357138117,670
30 September 2012361139017,827
30 June 2012361140017,943
31 March 2012359140318,001
31 Dec 2011360141018,133
30 Sept 2011360140918,167
30 June 2011364142118,309
31 March 2011365143018,484
31 Dec 2010367144318,681
30 Sept 2010369143818,601
30 June 2010370145518,944
31 March 2010374147019,115
31 Dec 2009378149119,359
30 Sept 2009377148619,296
30 June 2009384150119,479
31 March 2009394152719,739
31 Dec 2008399153719,879
30 Sept 2008405155120,025
30 June 2008415155219,856
31 March 2008421156920,018
31 Dec 2007428158520,182
30 Sept 2007435159320,163
30 June 2007439159820,120

Further information, including numbers of venues, machines and expenditure by territorial authority and changes in the quarter, is available from the Department’s Gaming Statistics web page at:

The figures are based on territorial authority boundaries that existed prior to the new Auckland super city.

Back to top

Gaming machine societies’ contacts

The Department’s gambling compliance and licensing inspectors each have responsibilities for liaising with gaming machine societies. If societies have issues to discuss, they may contact these inspectors first by phoning the Department’s toll free number 0800 257 887.

ApplicantCompliance InspectorLicensing Inspector
AHAURA/GREY VALLEY LIONS CLUB INCORPORATEDDave Macdonald ext 3152Janet Wong ext 5505
AIR RESCUE SERVICES LIMITEDDave Macdonald ext 3152Niall Miller ext 5485
BLUE WATERS COMMUNITY TRUSTArtie McClelland ext 7915Jeremy Belcher ext 7916
BLUEGRASS TRUSTDave Macdonald ext 3152Niall Miller ext 5485
BLUESKY COMMUNITY TRUST LIMITEDJohn Hennebry ext 7939Jeremy Belcher ext 7916
CONSTELLATION COMMUNITIES TRUST INCORPORATEDArtie McClelland ext 7915Jeremy Belcher ext 7916
CUESPORTS FOUNDATION LIMITEDStephen Bass ext 7168Niall Miller ext 5485
DRAGON COMMUNITY TRUST LIMITEDJohn Hennebry ext 7939Craig Holmes ext 5486
FIRST LIGHT COMMUNITY FOUNDATION LIMITEDTheresa Sarten ext 5258Janet Wong ext 5505
FIRST SOVEREIGN TRUST LIMITEDAndy Cruickshank ext 7267Rochell Goodwin-Kanara ext 5350
FOUR WINDS FOUNDATION LIMITEDJohn Hennebry ext 7939Brent Addison ext 5345
GRASSROOTS TRUSTClark McMichael ext 7268Janet Wong ext 5505
ILT FOUNDATIONIain Ballantyne 03 409 2158Janet Wong ext 5505
INFINITY FOUNDATION LIMITEDTheresa Sarten ext 5258Brent Addison ext 5345
KAIWAKA SPORTS ASSOCIATION INCORPORATEDStephen Bass ext 7168Rochell Goodwin-Kanara ext 5350
LIONS CLUB OF OHAI-NIGHTCAPS INCORPORATEDIain Ballantyne 03 409 2158Craig Holmes ext 5486
MAINLAND FOUNDATION LIMITEDDuane Calvert ext 6609Janet Wong ext 5505
MANA COMMUNITY GRANTS FOUNDATIONErin Moyle ext 5711Janet Wong ext 5505
MT WELLINGTON FOUNDATION LIMITEDTrevor Franklin ext 7573Poni Lealofi ext 5380
NAUTILUS FOUNDATIONCliff Simpson ext 7937Jeremy Belcher ext 7916
NEW ZEALAND COMMUNITY TRUSTGarth Cherrington ext 5520Rochell Goodwin-Kanara ext 5350
NEW ZEALAND RACING BOARDGarth Cherrington ext 5520Niall Miller ext 5485
OXFORD SPORTS TRUST INCORPORATEDCliff Simpson ext 7937Jeremy Belcher ext 7916
PELORUS TRUSTBrad Avery ext 5498Niall Miller ext 5485
PRIME COMMUNITY TRUSTBrad Avery ext 5498Niall Miller ext 5485
PUB CHARITYErin Moyle ext 5711Niall Miller ext 5485
PUB CHARITY LIMITEDErin Moyle ext 5711Niall Miller ext 5485
REDWOOD TRUST INCORPORATEDDave Macdonald ext 3152Janet Wong ext 5505
THE AKARANA COMMUNITY TRUST LIMITEDArtie McClelland ext 7915Janet Wong ext 5505
THE BENDIGO VALLEY SPORTS & CHARITY FOUNDATIONDuane Calvert ext 6609Janet Wong ext 5505
THE BRUNNER RUGBY LEAGUE CLUB INCORPORATEDIain Ballantyne 03 409 2158Brent Addison ext 5345
THE LION FOUNDATION (2008) John Hennebry ext 7939Craig Holmes ext 5486
THE NORTH & SOUTH TRUST LIMITEDCliff Simpson ext 7937Jeremy Belcher ext 7916
THE PODIUM SPORTS FOUNDATION LIMITEDTrevor Franklin ext 7573Niall Miller ext 5485
THE PEGASUS SPORTS FOUNDATION LTDStephen Bass ext 7168Jeremy Belcher ext 7916
THE SOUTHERN TRUSTRon Grob ext 6603Poni Lealofi ext 5380
THE TRUSTS COMMUNITY FOUNDATION LIMITEDTony Climo 03 409 2158Brent Addison ext 5345
TRILLIAN TRUSTStephen Bass ext 7168Poni Lealofi ext 5380
TRUST AORAKI LIMITEDRon Grob ext 6603Janet Wong ext 5505
TRUST HOUSE FOUNDATIONBrad Avery ext 5498Brent Addison ext 5345
WATER SAFETY EDUCATION FOUNDATIONGarth Cherrington ext 5520Janet Wong ext 5505
WHITEHOUSE TAVERN TRUSTCliff Simpson ext 7937Jeremy Belcher ext 7916
YOUTHTOWN INCORPORATEDTrevor Franklin ext 7573Brent Addison ext 5345

Back to top

Regulatory Services

Gambling compliance issues are covered by Regulatory Services which sits within the Department’s Policy, Regulatory and Ethnic Affairs branch under Deputy Chief Executive, Paul James.

The branch encompasses all the roles where the Department is, in effect, the regulator of a sector of the economy. In addition to gambling, this includes community safety (censorship and anti-spam compliance), fire service policy, identity services policy, local government, community and voluntary sector policy, civil defence and emergency management policy and crown entity monitoring functions, and Office of Ethnic Affairs. For the sake of simplicity, functions outside of the gambling sector are not included on this page.

View a large version of this diagram

Regulatory Services: Responsible for all regulation and compliance operations (and operational policy) including anti-spam, censorship, gambling, racing, anti-money laundering and countering financing of terrorism.

Operations Support: Provides support and assistance to operational compliance functions across the group and wider Department

Regulatory Investigations: Undertakes significant (complex, cross group, lengthy and sensitive) investigation projects involving criminal, legal and financial issues related to the governance and operation of gaming sector people and organisations. Provides expertise and support to investigations and audits across the group.

Financial Integrity: Under the Anti-Money Laundering and Countering Financing of Terrorism Act 2009, monitors casinos, non-deposit-taking lenders, money changers and reporting entities not covered by the other supervisors, The Reserve Bank and the Securities Commission.

Gambling Compliance: Responsible for the Inspectors and other staff working with the gambling sector to bring about compliance with the law. Works closely with Policy so that there is a constant flow of information between the staff involved in applying the law and those who develop the law.

Gaming Technology: This position oversees the technical integrity of gaming issues across casino and all other classes of gambling.

Operational Policy: Provides support and advice to the Inspectors and other staff working in the sector. Develops standards, game rules and other “deemed regulations”. In broad terms, develops Department policies for how the law will be turned into the work done in the field.

Casino Compliance: Responsible for working with the casino sector to bring about compliance with the law.

Licensing Compliance: Responsible for Class 4 Licensing, championing a new electronic licensing regime and management oversight of the Electronic Monitoring System (EMS) contract with Intralot.

Sector Initiatives: Responsible for developing new and innovative approaches to promoting and securing increased compliance across the gambling sector.

Back to top


All Gambling Compliance staff can be contacted by phoning the Department’s toll free number 0800 257 887.



Postal address and fax numbers:


PO Box 805, Wellington 6140, Fax: (04) 494 0624


PO Box 10-095, The Terrace, Wellington 6140,
Fax: (04) 494 0656

PO Box 2220, Auckland 1140, Fax: (09) 362 7945

PO Box 10-095, The Terrace, Wellington 6140,
Fax: (04) 495 7214

PO Box 1308, Christchurch 8140

Back to top


The Department of Internal Affairs produces Gambits four times a year.

Gambits provides information about the Department’s recent work and significant issues in the gambling sector. It is intended for sector organisations and the community in general, to increase understanding of and compliance with the law.

Editor: Trevor Henry
Telephone: (04) 495 7211 or 021 245 8642

Back to top

Do you want to receive Departmental media releases and Gambits?

If you would like to have your organisation added to the Department’s distribution list for media releases about gambling issues, or want to receive Gambits but are not currently on the mailing list, please fill out this form and return it, or email the information to:

Trevor Henry, Communications Advisor, Department of Internal Affairs
PO Box 805, Wellington 6140
Telephone: (04) 495 7211, Fax: (04) 495 7224, Email:

Back to top

Return to the Gambits home page