Thrush would like the Ministry of Health to disburse some of the money it collects from the problem gambling levy on pokies, back to their operators, to pay for the licensing of that software.
He said the Ministry of Health's refusal to allow problem gambling funds to be spent on the software were "disrupting the self determination efforts of problem gamblers".
"There are 148 facial recognition systems already installed in venues across New Zealand. The class 4 industry - the societies - spent $3.5m themselves because they don't want problem gamblers in their venues," he said.
What they're looking for is for the Ministry of Health to use their unspent $1.5m technology fund for software licensing, which should be bought for the whole country at once so that every region gets a fair deal."
A spokeswoman for the Ministry said it already worked with the association on facial recognition software.
"As part of this service we fund a database that has the capability to securely store photos to support facial recognition systems, making it easier for venues to incorporate these into their systems," the spokeswoman said.
But the spokeswoman said that both the Ministry and the Department of Internal Affairs believed it "would not be appropriate for the Ministry of Health to fund software licenses for gambling venues".
"Venues receive a commission payment of up to 16 per cent of gaming machine profits to meet the operational costs of hosting gambling. This includes the costs associated with meeting harm minimisation requirements," the spokeswoman said.
The Problem Gambling Foundation supports the use of technology, but like the Ministry, it thinks the pokie operators themselves should pay to licence the software.
Problem Gambling Foundation's communications director Andree Froude said the current exclusion system was "cumbersome".
"The system at the moment often involves the person who is gambling providing a photo and then the venue making sure they are not entering the venue, so it is quite cumbersome," she said.
She cautioned against the technology being seen as a "magic bullet for preventing gambling harm".
Froude said venues and trusts that own the machines have a "host responsibility" to gamblers, and under that, they should pay for the cost of licensing the machines.