Playing futile games

The Auckland council has taken an official stance against the Government's deal with Sky City.  TVNZ reports:

Councillors object because they feel the social impact from problem gambling will be too high.
Councillor Cathy Casey wanted to know if councillors thought the deal was morally correct.
She said the majority of the council has sent a very strong message to the Government that this deal is wrong.

 This seems a noble thing to do on the outset.  The council are standing up and saying that they don't want more gambling in Auckland, and they are concerned about the rise in problem gambling that this might cause.

But they are missing out some details.

That's partially because the details haven't been all confirmed yet. How can they oppose a deal that hasn't even been finished yet?

They also don't mention that this deal will NOT see a rise in the number of pokie machines in Auckland.  The other measures that have been put through has actually had a significant impact on the number of pokie machines. There has already been a reduction of about 3000 pokie machines since National came into power.  Adding 230 to Sky City is less than 10% of that number.

I am a statistics teacher. As a result I have an aversion to pokie machines, as I think they are generally just a desperation tax.  However if what we are doing is moving pokie machines from pubs in poor suburbs into a controlled environment in the central city, and getting a convention center as part of the deal, that doesn't sound too bad.

However we don't know the details.  So when 10 councilors come out and officially oppose it seems like nothing more than playing a futile political game, trying to do a favour for their friends in the Labour and Green parties on a national level.  I'm not sure that's what Auckland rate-payers really want from their council.