COUNTRY RACING CLUBS.

Auckland Star, Volume XLII, Issue 195, 17 August 1911, Page 7

COUNTRY RACING CLUBS.

aBGT raiEWTS FOB RESTITUTION RACING COMMISSION CRITICISED. GOME CANDID OPINIONS. /By Telegraph.—Parliamentary Heporter.> WELLINGTON, Wednesday. The second reading ol Mr. Jennings' Ga:niiig Art Amendment Bill came on this evening. The mover, 'in the course of his remarks, expressed the opinion that the allocation of the permits to .country clubs by the Racing Commission 'bad not been fairly made. This hill, he explained, was for the purpose ol remedying the injustice that had bocu perpetrated upon u number of clubs, laany of which had been in existence from 30 to 35 years. The Rangitikei Club was one in point, having been wiped out after existing for over 35 years. The member pointed out that Inst year' the division list ivia in favour of the country clubs by a majority of one before the question went to tho Upper llou-e. The lion, the Premier (Sir Joseph Ward), Mr. Jennings said, had pictured as a result of the possible wiping out of country clubs exactly what had now happened. The object of the Gaming Act, contended the member, was for the reduction of gaming, and not to make any sweeping injury to the country club. The derision of tho Commission had defeated the object of tho Act, in so far as .it tended to drive gamin<r to the big centre, where it was acknowledged the gambling evil was most in evidence. Country clubs averaged but £2OOO a day in totalisator investments, as against an average of nearly £20.1)00 for one of tho big metropolitan chilis. The racing clubs, he pointed out. had been reduced by 43 permits anil trotting by 11 permits, but the, reduction, when analysed, allowed that metropolitan elnbs. with fi."S days' racing last year, were only reduced by four days, while country clubs, with 177 days' racing, were reduced by 30 days, and in many cases -were wiped out altogether. Mr. Poole: Why not provide for a redistribution of permits?

Mr. Jennings: I am dealing with that phase. Tlie member went on to suggest that, so l\ir us totaiisator permits were concerned, the whole power of allotting these permits should not be left in the ■hands of the Racing Conference, but that the Minister in charge should at leu-st hold ten or a dozen permits, or as many as he thought necessnry, in order to be able to grant permits where a good case was made out, as in the increase of population. The north of Auckland was par ticularly applicable as an instance of the necessity of such provision. Country clubs provided more in the shape of picnic meetings than in gambling gatherings, and the gross injustice done might •well be in some part remedied by the reinstatement of the fourteen days ho asked for in the bill, which he left in confidence to the House. The menrber pointed out. also, that several clubs that previously possessed no permits had claims to consideration.

Mr. Forbes expressed the opinion that the necessity for the bill showed what was to be expected when the Government delegated its powers to a board. Country clubs provided the purest Bport, and in his opinion, although the number of days allotted to racing in the Dominion were sufficient, the allocation had been far from fair. The reduction, contended the mcnfbp.r. had bona altogether too hasty. Nothing had been gained by placing these clubs in an unfortunate position. If a decision had been given in accordance wfrjh what Parliament bad expected thttb would have been no occasion for tbea;* to have come hack and asked for an amelioration of the conditions under which the Country clubs now laboured.

Mr. Field expressed the hope that the bill would meet with the approval of the House, although he also hoped that when it canie to the committee stage some additions would be made to tho schedule. Mr. Wright thought that country clubs should be allowed to have as many meetings as they pleased. But why keep totalisator permits if they were picnic clubs? Why should they want the totalisators?

Mr. McDonald intimated that ho would more an amendment for the inclusion of the Karaka and Opotiki clubs in the schedule.

Mr. Taylor argued that the recommendation of the Commission neither carried out the spirit nor the intention of the Art. .Although lie was not against racing, he was firmly of the opinion that it should be divorced from gambling. "1 am thoroughly dissatisfied with missioners' >eport, and with the spirit in which it was carried out. It is a distinct step towards retrogression in so far as it arcntuates gambling by concentrating is in the big centres, and I am sure that this discussion will be the death knell of the totalisator," concluded the speaker. Mr. Pearcc contended that the increase In totalisator investments only served to show what an enormous amount of money was previously going to the bookmakers. "I am going to support this bill, because the opinion of the House last year was that one-day clubs should not b e interfered with at all. The meetings in the country are not only more in the truest interests of racing as a sport, nut are also big encouraging factors in the breeding of good horses, and our intention was that country clubs should remain," remarked the member.

Mr. Poole also expressed Lis disapproval of the findings of the Commission. He could quite appreciate the protest of hon. members against the wiping out of the country club?, but lie disagreed with the bill in so far as it made provision for an increase of licenses rather than a redistribution. This. he argued, was against public opinion, and also against the legislation passed last year, and the consequent instructions imposed on the Commission. Restriction must be put upon the gambling mechanism of this country, and he must, therefore, oppose the bill because it appeared to be a deliberate attempt to increase tote licenses. Air. Scott supported the bill, as he considered the cutting out of the small country meeting was against the intention cf the Act passed last year. Mr. Glover added his voice to the support of the bill, and in doing so. put in n pirn for Takapuna, which, he declared, had not been dealt with fairly by the Commission. It was an immensely popular course, yet had been reduced by nearly half in the matter of permits. Gambling, he contended, had gone up by leaps and bounds since the .Act had come into force.

Mr. Poland said that from the first ho had not had much faith in the appointment of the Commission, and the introduction of tho bill only confirmed that lack of faith. It was an absurd thing, for Instance, that a plnce like Waihl. with a population of over 6000, should be denied the privilege of g, race meeting.

Mr. Stallworthy Mid he intended to oppose the bill, because he considered the number of permits wns already sufficient, and he was not going to help increase the number. Messrs. Mander and MacLoren also intimated that they opposed the bill. COUNTRY RACING CLUBS. The Hon. Mr. liuddo said that less fatisfaetion would have occurred had Parliament given a general direction for the Racing Commission. A clear inference, however, was given that the Commission should give consideration to those clubs which only had one day's racing a year. The Commission, however, eluded that provision. The tendency of their report wns to establish close corporations of racing in the large centres, and it did not carry out the intention* of Parliament.

Sir Jas. Carroll said that, by the Act of last year, the arranging of the permits for 12 months was delegated to the Commission, after which the Minister of Internal Affairs would be the responsible one for considering the revision of permits. The 12 months had only just commenced, and it was only fair that Parliament should give a fair trial to the results of its legislation. Several other members spoke in support of the bill, after which Mr. Jennings replied. The second reading wns carried by 35 votes to 16. and the bill was set down for committal on Thursday, August 31.