Government backbenchers yesterday agreed that the amendments to the Lotteries and Other Games Act protected the vulnerable. However, some called for harsher regulations and restrictions on the gaming sector, shorter opening times of the gambling parlours and banning advertising promoting gambling.

Nationalist MP Beppe Fenech Adami said that one of the main objects of the Bill was the protection of children and minors, who were being abusively attracted to gaming. Many bars and clubs had gambling and amusement machines, and many young people lost all their pocket money on such machines during weekends.

Dr Fenech Adami said it was very important that MPs sent a strong message that children, minors and the vulnerable were being protected.

The Bill established the principle that gambling machines were to be prohibited in social clubs which often also served as centres of learning. The same principle applied to educational establishments such as sports complexes. Gaming outlets would not be permitted near churches, schools, playgrounds and in village cores.

The Bill also provided for heavier penalties and limited opening and closing times. The courts were being given the right to order the destruction of gambling machines which could no longer be classified as serving for amusement purposes.

Dr Fenech Adami concluded that best results would be obtained only by regulating and restricting the gaming sector.

Philip Mifsud (PN) said the number of gaming outlets had increased substantially over the last few years.

Regulations on gaming should also include other gaming activities, such as internet gambling. Even if remote gaming was a source of revenue to the country’s exchequer, one should protect those who were becoming addicted.

Calling for curbing advertising of such activities, Mr Mifsud praised the introduction of the central control system which ensured continuous monitoring. Besides imposing restrictions, the Bill was also discouraging investors from opening such businesses.

He said he understood that the opposition was to vote against the Bill because it was contesting the discretionary powers given to the minister. He called for consensus from all MPs, adding that one should send a message that the Bill would protect all citizens.

Joe Falzon (PN) also spoke about the protection of vulnerable persons. He said it was true that the vast majority of people took part in raffles and lotteries, national or otherwise, but the problems set in when individuals got into the habit of gambling for the sake of winning money.

Mepa was also involved in the problem when the use of a shop was changed. There were a number of legal-notice loopholes that needed to be plugged. Changing a shop into a gaming outlet needed to be the subject of a specific application, which would be approved only after careful assessment.

Over the past months there had been exchanges between Mepa and the Gaming Authority on appropriate location for such gaming outlets. If the latter found that the gaming outlet was being considered for overly sensitive areas it would not issue a licence.

The Bill under consideration sought to be, as much as possible, a foolproof vehicle for the regulation of gaming. It also sought to ensure that gambling did not become a stumbling block for the right kind of development for Maltese families.

Mr Falzon agreed with Labour MP Carmelo Abela on how many other vices could grow out of compulsive gambling, but there were other aspects that had not hitherto been given enough consideration. These included the holding of unregulated gambling, in both streets and clubs. The reality “out there” must be very carefully addressed.

It was not just a question of agreeing or disagreeing, but rather one of doing all that needed to be done to alleviate the problem of gambling as much as possible.

Nationalist MP Jean Pierre Farrugia said that the need for government intervention arose from the liberal situation which prevailed in the country. He spoke on the amendments included in the Bill and proposed that the minimum age for gambling be increased from 18 to 21 years.

Regulation was welcome and should be rigorous. The situation was preoccupying because there were many young people who were addicted to computer games.

He criticised the proposal that gaming outlets be permitted to open as early as 11 a.m. These outlets had to have CCTV to facilitate identification and restrict entry. It was wise to propose that these outlets would not be easily accessible because they were not in the village core.

The Bill was too simplistic. Regulations were therefore important. The identification of clients and the introduction of a bank guarantee were important because they could lead to better observation of regulations. Dr Farrugia also praised the prohibition of selling food and drinks in gaming parlours.

Stephen Spiteri (PN) said there was no doubt that gambling could ruin whole families, often leading to usury and other criminal activity. Gambling was ingrained in Maltese culture. The government intended to regulate the sector to protect families from serious problems. He called for more controls on advertising of lotto and betting.

The Bill introduced measures against money laundering. Enforcement was being strengthened. One had to consider licensing a small number of gaming outlets which operated professionally. Other conditions imposed could exclude foreign companies from operating in the local market.

Nationalist MP Ċensu Galea said it was gratifying that both sides of the House agreed on the need for better regulation of gaming. Most people would gamble anyway, and this should be borne well in mind when debating legislation.

The House Social Affairs Committee had issued a statement saying that as the country had banned advertising of cigarettes and tobacco products but to little real effect, so did it need to ban advertising on gambling. There should also be conspicuous warnings that “Gambling can kill”.

Mr Galea warned, however, against illusions that such steps would solve the problems of gambling once and for all. Serious campaigns should be mounted to show the pitfalls of gambling on the gambler himself and his family. Low-income families, especially, must be made to understand that gambling would only help exacerbate money availability problems, rather than solve them.

People who could not really afford it were addicted to playing such state-sanctioned gaming as lotto and Super 5. It hurt to hear that when the prize fund of Super 5 rose to dizzying heights even groceries could feel the drop in sales.

Parish priests and their allied organisations should need licences to organise such harmless-looking activities as coffee mornings with tombola and other games.

Reality did not make for a beautiful picture. It was good that philanthropic organisations continued to push for better and stronger regulation of gambling. All too often the urge to gamble led people to fall victims to usury, losing all hope of ever solving their problems.

Mr Galea said careful attention must also be paid to how to control activities in band clubs. If the club was teaching students to play music it should be considered as a school, and should therefore not even be allowed to have tombola or lotto activities.

Clearer and foolproof regulation of the gambling sector should be the name of the game, and this was what the Bill was trying to achieve. Having a lesser number of gaming outlets, even if with a larger number of machines, would make it easier to keep track of such outlets and control them better.

Mr Galea remained in possession when the debate was suspended at 9 p.m.

The debate continues when the House meets again on Monday.