Honourable senators, this item stands adjourned in the name of Senator Housakos. I ask for leave of the Senate that following my remarks, the balance of his time to speak to this bill be reserved.

Is leave granted, honourable senators?

So ordered.

Honourable senators, I wish to add my support to Senator Marty Deacon’s Bill S-269 on gambling advertisements.

A recent report by the CBC showed how many televised sporting events contain ads for gambling sites. It seems the ads are now competing with the actual sporting event, given the large number of ads shown. The total impact is beyond the pale.

For far too many Canadians, such ads are more than a mere annoyance interfering with the simple enjoyment of sporting events.

For anyone with a gambling addiction, or for anyone who thinks they can make easy money, they are at risk of suffering severe financial damage — damage not only for themselves but for their family as well.

In Prince Edward Island, we are constantly hearing in the media about fraud cases caused by gambling addiction, leading to jail time.

Evidence of the abuse of sports betting is as close as a newspaper or the latest sports report. As Senator Marty Deacon noted, sports betting has enjoyed revenue in the billions of dollars in recent years, and what often follows money is corruption.

Recently, in Major League Baseball, a player’s friend and employee was charged with theft to feed what can only be described as a massive sports gambling habit.

In basketball, the head coach for the Cleveland NBA team told reporters that he received “crazy messages about where I live, and my kids” from someone betting on basketball. With so much money involved, the temptation toward misconduct is almost overwhelming.

In the words of the coach:

. . . it is a dangerous game and a fine line that we’re walking for sure. It brings added pressure, a distraction to the game that can be difficult for players, coaches, referees, and everybody that’s involved in it. I think we really have to be careful with how close we let it get to the game and the security of the people who are involved in it because it does carry weight. A lot of times, people who are gambling, this money pays their light bill or pays their rent, and then the emotions that come from that.

Fans are also beginning to wonder, given the amount of gambling money involved, if the games they are watching are fixed.

Earlier this year, Jontay Porter, a player for the Toronto Raptors, was banned for life from the National Basketball Association after an investigation by the league. Mr. Porter was determined to have been betting on NBA games, including a Raptors game. He also disclosed confidential information about his health to a known bettor, the type of inside information that can affect bets and the odds of a payoff.

Perhaps most seriously, the NBA found that he had:

. . . limited his own game participation to influence the outcome of one or more bets on his performance in at least one Raptors game.

In that case, a US$80,000 bet was placed that Porter would score fewer than two three-point baskets in the Raptors’ March 20, 2024, game. In that game, he did not even attempt a three-point shot, leaving the game after a couple of minutes, claiming illness. That bet raised suspicions, was reported to the league, was investigated, and he was expelled.

Colleagues, Canadians are wondering how many other cases of game fixing are being missed. There are serious concerns that games might be rigged, not only by the players but also by officials. Are “missed calls” truly missed, or are they something else? After all, if you can’t be sure the game is fair and not fixed, why bother watching it or, more importantly, even bet on it?

There’s a lot of money at play in these games. A single NHL game can generate millions in bets — enough money for some to regard their bet as an investment to be secured by whatever means necessary. As ex-Major League Baseball commissioner Fay Vincent stated:

. . . I don’t think the next 20 or 30 years is going to be a pretty story about gambling in the sports world because the money is going to be so enormous, and wherever the money is enormous the corruption follows.

Colleagues, a key argument in favour of the legalization of single-event sport betting when it was before the Senate was that it would:

. . . regulate sports betting in Canada, strengthen consumer protections to ensure the safety of those participating and bring revenues and tax dollars inside our borders to invest back into our communities.

We now have the legislation. It is time to focus on regulations to ensure the safety of those participating. And just how much of the revenue gained is being invested back in our communities?

We often hear from representatives of the gambling industry that gambling is legal, but so are tobacco and cannabis, for that matter. That does not exempt these products from strict regulation regarding their sale, consumption and advertising. After all, driving is legal as well, but every aspect of it from the driver to the car to the road itself is subject to varying levels of regulation. It is time to impose restrictions on gambling ads.

Of course, if it were that easy, it would have been done by now. Senator Deacon of Ontario has cited the Charter of Rights and Freedoms as well as the proactive legal battles to restrict tobacco advertising as major hurdles to imposing the same restrictions on gambling advertising.

However, exploiting people and their hopes for an easy win is at the very heart of gambling. After all, “Give us your money, and, in all likelihood, you’ll never see it again” is not much of a marketing slogan. As the saying goes, you’re the one gambling; the house knows it will always come out ahead.

The Charter sets a high bar when it comes to restricting the right to free expression, but that right is not absolute, including when it comes to advertising. It is not a matter of saving people from themselves. You cannot legislate away human weakness, but you can limit the ability of others to profit from that weakness.

It may well be that the Broadcasting Act might provide an avenue by which this problem can be addressed. Under the act, the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission, the CRTC, has the power to make regulations “. . . respecting the character of advertising and the amount of broadcasting time that may be devoted to advertising.” It seems to me that this issue relates to the character of advertising, so we may have an opening there.

Furthermore, although the commission has stated that “the CRTC doesn’t directly regulate advertising content, except advertising to children and alcohol ads,” the fact that exceptions have been made in the past suggests that more can be made in the future. Even restricting the time of day such ads may be broadcast could be helpful. Perhaps the successful campaign to restrict alcohol advertising can provide guidance for similar efforts in this area.

Personally, I would like to see the maximum restrictions possible on sport gambling advertising. This is not the immediate purpose of the bill before us today, but it is something to consider. This bill is an important first step.

Looking at the study of Bill C-218 back in 2021, I was struck by an attitude of “Well, people are going to gamble whether it’s legal or not, so we may as well legalize it, and that way we can keep an eye on things.” However, with these constant ads, it appears that we are trying to induce many more people to gamble.

Recently, in introducing the Professional Women’s Hockey League Ottawa team to the Senate, Senator Pate mentioned watching “Hockey Night in Canada” with her father every Saturday night. Imagine parents watching sports today, having to explain to their children what those betting ads mean. How many future lives will be destroyed when they follow their sports heroes’ advice and start betting on games?

Given that senators have fixed terms in office, we have the opportunity for a more detailed review of legislation and its impacts, intended or otherwise, than our colleagues in the House of Commons. To that end, I suggest to Senator Marty Deacon that the Senate undertake a study of what was promised when Canada legalized single-game sports betting and what has actually happened. How much money is made? Is that money staying in Canada? Where is it going? Have there been unforeseen impacts? This is an opportunity to study the impacts of legislation we have already passed.

But getting back to the business at hand, despite my belief that Bill S-269 does not go far enough, it does go in the right direction. That is why I support this bill. I thank Senator Deacon of Ontario for her work on this policy file.

Thank you, colleagues.

Yes. I didn’t even know you were here. Thank you.

Thank you, Senator Deacon. With the new seating plan, I wasn’t sure where you were sitting. I’m glad to see you are here.

Again, I want to thank you for your initiative on this work. Given your personal background in sports, you are well aware of the impacts of gambling ads. I think we have enough information now. There has been a tremendous backlash. Ontario has already removed celebrity sports heroes from their advertising.

That said, I saw one the other night while watching a game where Jamie Foxx, an American actor, was selling something or other. Now you can bet on part of a game or the whole game. You can bet on somebody scoring in the next 10 minutes. It goes on and on. It is far too accommodating.

There is nothing wrong if people want to bet on a game. I go to the horse races in Charlottetown occasionally and bet on a horse. I rarely cash a ticket, but I’m not spending a lot of money doing it.

My concern is people who are triggered into addiction, people trying to recover from gambling addiction and, most importantly, young people. As I mentioned, the ads on now are impacting young people. It is a tremendous problem when young people see celebrities on TV urging them to take action and thinking they can make easy money. Of course, with gambling, we always hear about something who cashes the $4,000 ticket. We never hear about people who, year after year, lose $1,000 or $5,000. They don’t speak up. That impacts the perception that you can make easy money.

I think we have more than enough data, and we should act now. I think this is the chamber to do it because we have tenure here. We have the time it takes. This chamber passed the legislation, and we know the House of Commons is not going to do anything. They are somewhat dysfunctional at the moment, and some would argue are constantly dysfunctional compared to the Senate. This is the chamber that can do it. We have the resources and expertise. We have the people. I looked around at some of your seatmates who have experience in sports. We have people with experience in the law and in business. We have the capacity to undertake this study and correct this problem.

I think the balance is important, obviously. One of the arguments we heard about cannabis when we legalized that was that we needed to take it out of the black market and make it safer for people who wanted to consume it, but I don’t recall a lot of ads on TV saying you should go to the local store if you have never tried it. In fact, I think consumption has decreased. I think in Prince Edward Island it has since it was legalized, so there wasn’t a rush of people trying it. I think there is a rush of people trying gambling because when you’re sitting there watching the game, you might think, “I know what’s going to happen.” You are an armchair quarterback for the team, and you think you know better than you actually do, and you lose money — a lot of money in some cases.