I agree with the thrust of this amendment and I understand where the Senators are coming from. I am conscious of the parameters that are laid down in section 13 regarding membership of the authority and the parameters laid down in section 15 in respect of the criteria for the Public Appointments Service that must be applied in recommending somebody to the Minister for appointment. Can the Minister of State address a number of issues in this area? First, amendment No. 37 has a reference to a person who has personal …

I would have thought this was covered by section 6(1)(b) of the Freedom of Information Act, but I just want to be clear in terms of the proposer of amendment No. 70. Part 2 of this Bill establishes the body of the gambling regulator. Section 6(1)(b) would state that any body established by statute is covered. Therefore, I am assuming if that is the case, and I am open to contradiction by the Minister in that regard, section 6(1)(b) of the Act covers us. Is the proposer of the amendment happy with that, if that is t…

Will the Minister of State explain something? As it stands, section 43 defines three terms to be used in Chapter 3, which establishes the national gambling exclusion register. This is an important part of the Bill, it is very worthwhile, and I think we would all support the idea that it is there. At the moment, that section defines three terms: "initial period", "relevant date" and "relevant exclusion period", and in each case refers to where that term is defined later on the Chapter. The "initial period" is define…

I want to address an issue raised by Senator Black because amendment No. 79 would appear, from my reading of it, to give the gambling authority the power to say to a bookie or a company offering a gambling product that it cannot retain personal information that essentially can be used for marketing purposes. That seems to be eminently sensible. I favour generally that the gambling authority would have as many powers as possible so it can do whatever it needs to. My question relates to section 152, which essentially…

We are at the end of a grouping of some 21 amendments, Nos. 75 to 96, inclusive. It is the eleventh grouping of 28 in the list we have. The groupings are obviously hugely helpful to allow us to move on. However, given that mistakes were made today by people who did not realise where subsequent amendments were part of a group, if it would make more sense for the groups to be numbered, at least, as it is just a bullet list. This is not specific to the Bill but more a procedural issue. Is there a reason it cannot be d…

I have no problem with the list but it is bullet points. The groups are not identiable one from the other except by the name. If one could refer to group A, B or C or group 9 or whatever it is it would be easier because it is quite difficult to navigate.

I move amendment No. 113: In page 56, between lines 2 and 3, to insert the following: "(4)(a) Nothing in this Act shall be construed as conferring any authorisation or entitlement on a person licensed under this Act to provide a gambling activity on the National Lottery, held on behalf of the Minister for Public Expenditure, National Development Plan Delivery and Reform, under the National Lottery Act 2013, unless expressly authorised to do so in accordance with Part 7 of that Act. (b) It shall be an offence for a …

I understand where the Minister of State is coming from. However, although this Bill comes under his remit, and I acknowledge the enormous volume of work that he has done on it as well as within the Department to bring it here, it affects every Department and its success affects every Department. I understand what he said. He started out by saying that we cannot guarantee that the money that would be saved through this mechanism would necessarily go back to the national lottery. That is true. However, since I publi…

If he is willing to put my Bill through, we will get it done.

Is that an expression of support for the Bill?

I have one more question, as to whether these three specific amendments were brought to the attention of the Department and whether it has considered them or whether that is yet to happen.

I move amendment No. 114: In page 56, line 3, to delete “or (3)” and substitute “, (3) or (4) ”.

I move amendment No. 115: In page 56, between lines 8 and 9, to insert the following: “ Amendment of the National Lottery Act 2013 66. The national lottery Act 2013 is amended as follows: (a) In section 2 by the insertion of the following definitions: “ ‘bet’ shall have the meaning assigned to it by section 1 of the Betting Act 1931; ‘betting offer’ means a bet offered by a bookmaker; ‘bookmaker’, for the purposes of section 46 of the National Lottery Act 2013, means a person, who in the course of business, takes b…

It almost seems as if this might be something outside the Minister of State's remit given the reference to the national lottery. I cannot help thinking that these amendments do not impact directly on the national lottery but impact upon the companies who will be regulated by this Bill. This is in exactly the same way that I was proposing in my amendments earlier that would have an impact on the people and companies who are to be regulated by this Bill and not the national lottery itself. While, again, I accept the …

I move amendment No. 121: In page 64, to delete lines 24 to 37, and in page 65, to delete lines 1 to 9 and substitute the following: “ “maximum relevant payment and maximum winnings” means such amount or amounts set by the Authority, with the consent of the Minister, in regulations made under subsection (2) of section 81;”. Amendment No. 121 refers to section 80 of the Bill which is Part 5. Essentially this section deals with preliminary, general matters and definitions which will apply to Part 5. Currently in this…

I dtús báire, gabhaim buíochas leis an Aire as an sárobair atá déanta aige agus a fhoireann ar an mBille seo. Feicim gur éist siad leis na daoine a bhí ag labhairt faoi na fadhbanna a raibh acu leis an mBille. Tá mé thar a bheith buíoch de as ucht na leasuithe atá déanta ag an Rialtas. Tá mé ag tnúth go mór le díospóireacht ar an mBille seo. Cuirim fáilte roimh an mBille agus na leasuithe. On Senator McDowell's amendments, I do not for a moment want the kind of gambling regime that is in the UK to come to this juri…

Yes, on the section.

Does section 1 contain the definitions? Perhaps I should come in on section 2.

It is not.

I want to specifically speak to amendment No. 37, which proposes to insert a new subsection (4) into section 2 to amend the definition, or rather, to make reference to the definition of a "relevant payment", specifically in paragraph (c) of that definition. This is important, because in the course of the amendments to the Bill, there is reference to bingo-type offerings and games. Amendment No. 340 specifically refers to the limits on the amounts of money that can be spent on tickets and books of tickets for bingo.…