VETOING THE LAW.

Auckland Star, Volume LVII, Issue 208, 2 September 1926, Page 15

VETOING THE LAW.

. Iβ MATTER OF RACING PERMITS.] J — ■ i COUWTRY CLUBS' DIFFICULTY, j 0 ____ c .. C COMMITTEE'S STRONG REPORT. p h ißy Telejjrapa. Parliamentary Kepi>rter.> t WELLINGTON, Wednesday, j J The New Zealand Racing Lonierenet? came under tne criticism ot a uuinjer 01 D members in tile ±iouse to-uay, \\uen a j r petition from the Cheviot haemg v.lvi» n «as reported on by the Petitions Loru- Jj mittee. it was in tlie discussion that Partiaaieat had been noute-i " .by the Racmg Conference, wiiich usurped the functions ot the Ministerlut Internal Affairs. Ihe Public Petitions Committee . reported that the Cheviot Racing Hub had been prevented from exercising rights conferred on it by section 7 or the vraming Act Amendment. 1!>24. to change . its constitution to trotting, by tiie presidents ot the New Zealand Racing ,- and Trotting Conferences respectively.] who have entered into an agreement not f to agree to any change from racing to trotting without a corresponding change | t from trotting to racing. The committee ' j t endorses the action already taken by tils j t Government in the matter, and is v strongly of opinion that the Government t should exercise all it* powers to give t effect to the Cheviot Racing Club* v petition, and. if necessary, to the extent of withholding the issue of totalisAtor licenses until the relief sought i=> granted- The committee, therefore, j, refers the petition to the Government E for favourable consideration. "Snuffing cut Small Clubs." Mr. G. VV. Forbes (Hurunuij explained ' that Cheviot was granted a totausator | s license on the recommendation ot a i " riaeing Commission, ou the ground that it was in an isolated position. A lurt'aer j Commission in 1920 found, that the course was unsuitable for racing, but j recommended the Minister to grant a | trotting permit. The Minister informed . them he had no statutory power to do ~ so, though he believed the application t justified. Ihe law was subsequently changed, enabling a club to change its I c constitution. The club had been heldj, up for the last two years, because t'.io | r i Racing Conference would not ajree to i the club exercising its right. Mr. Forbes < admitted the club did not promote big ( meetings , , but it held, what is looked j upon by all. as a nice picnic, and it j j seemed a pity that a small meeting like | j this should be prevented from changing j t from galloping to trotting, by reason of i "a gentlerran"s agreement"' between the Racing Conference and the Trotting Conference. Many another «tnall club would | ! be snuffed, out also if this agreement j were not altered. It was felt unfair that the Racing Conference should adopt the attitude it had done, and Mr. Forbes , wished to thank the committee for ita. ' favourable consideration. ! Sir Geo. Hunter (Waipawai said he did not know whether the Commission's recommendations with regard to improvements were carried out. | Mr. Forbes: They were all done. j < In that case, said Sir Georse. he hoped j i the restriction would soon be removed i I "Floating the Country's Laws." j! Mr. \V. E. Parry i Auckland Central i ! j congratulated the Minister on what he j had done for the safety of racing tracks.' t It did seem extraordinary that an all-] powerful. Mussolini-like organisation j could dictate to the country. He hoped | the Government would see to it that i the conference would not be allowed to side-step the law. Why shculd the . secretary of the Racing Conference j decide what should be done when a law | definins a definite course was on tlie | statute Book?. Not only \ra* the Racing j Conference- endeavouring to run its own ( sport, but it was beginning to wioli , strong influence in other important matters. If the Racing Conference went ! en flouting the laws of the country it was a slight on Parliament. Mr. R. W. Smith (Waimarino) said!' all who were interested . in the Subject | felt that small clubs had not been j ' treated fairly. The attitude of the Racing Conference had amounted to passive resistance. < Mr. A. Bell I Bay of Islands) *up- ' ported Mr. Forbes and hop<»d thp Minister would take a strons stand in this and other cases. He should not be dictated to by the Racinsr Conferr-ncr. Mr. -T. A. Lee (Auckland Fasti thoupht it very necessary th.Tt thp Miii«- ; ter should take the strongest possible stand a body which was apparently above thp law and beyond Parlia-| : ment. Thp "parliament"' outside Par- > list-mnri* n*>t bo * r " , '*-nn?p r bf*". Mr. V. H. Potter (RoskilH said the whole position lav between the Racing' Conference and the Trotting Conference. I Legislation should be brought down to i i prevent the Racing Conference from j carrying on a policy of victimisation of small clubs. It was unfair that the , conference should have power to dis-1 qualify horses that ran on any particular j course in wbat were. according to I statute, legitimate circumstances. That! power meant the killing of small dubs, j, "Small Regard For Parliament." Mr. P. Fraser (Wellington Central) said the impression made on the majority-1 of members of the Petitions Committee bjr Sir Geo. Clifford was that he had very small regard for Parliament- Hβ seemed to have, the idea that the final say did not rest with Parliament, nor vet with the Racing Conference, but in the last analysis with himself (Sir George Clifford). When any outside | ' individual was found taking up the posi- j tion that he could set Parliament at nought, steps should be taken to enforce the law. *. Mr. -R. McKeen (Wellington South) ' said he was honestly of opinion that ' behind the whole thing was the idea i of urging upon the Minister the necessity of further trotting meetings, which was an idea which could not be con- i sidered at the present time. j Mr. Atmore (Nelson) thought the question was pretty well thrashed out, but rose to urge that the authority of Parliament should be asserted this session. ' "A State Within a State." • Mr. M. J. Savage (Auckland West) characterised the Racing Conference aa -"a'State within a State-" TMs was not the ..first time that the great power of the Racing" Conference had been referred to. " , 3lr. VV. A. Veitch (Wanganui) contended , that a crisis had been reached i when it would-have to be decided whether Parliament or the Racing Conference : should rule. His own opinion was that ■ the Racing Conference deliberately set out to humiliate the Minister of Internal Affairs,. and under such cir- ■ cumstances every member, regardless of Parliament decided, tfcat -cluiw coold .change ' 'could be done apparently without application to the Eacing Conference. I

'"Parliament passes a law. giving certain powers to racing clubs, and the Racing Conference vetoes -it;" remarked Mr. H. E- Holland { Leader of the Opposition). "If the Racing Conference disqualifies a horse wnich should be entitled to run under the law, Parliament ought to disqualify the Racing Conference." It seemed to him that the Racing Conference was putting itself above Parliament, and >ir George Clifford put himself above the conference. He was the "all highest government of sport.' . Premier Advocates "Monroe Doctrine." The Prime Minister declared there had to be some governing body tor football. ! racing or anything eise. Surely Parlia- j ment did not wish to saddle itself with the details of racing administration.? The Cheviot Club nad a right to a permit. Mr. Smith: They can withhold a totaUsator permit. Rignt Hon *J. fr. Ccates: No. Mr. Potterr They would disqualify the horses. Mr. Ccates deprecated the rereivisees to Hr George Clifford. If any country ought to be thanki'ul to a ma 1 for lifting racing to a higii standard, New Zealand should be thanKlul to Sir George Clifford. Mr. Fraser: Vow lie things li-j should run Parliament and the t , ouf" , i' , jnce. The Premier went on to sag-rest that if these t«o racing wlk's '->a.JL a 'lisputi;, let them settle v. Lie thought h a tanthing to leave it to them. The Llouse was "only concerned to ™cc their tions complied with the law. The trouble was that those bodies did n<.t wish to luio a permitMr. Fraser: \ou are letting the Minister down hopelessly. Mr. Coates: I am sorry, or course, out he had the power or veto, though lie cannot take any action in i.hie i-as-:. Mr. Forbes: The\ have vero*»d him. Mr. Coatee replied he did not believe there was much wrong, but if people who governed sport couid not agree, why should Parliament get mixed up n U. i The case might be unfortunate, but v take the longer view it was best tU:U Parliament should not interfere. Hod. R. F Bollard. Minister of Internal Affairs, stated that the club's course wa= only five furlongs and not] suitable for racing. He had given permission for a trotting permit, but the two bodies could not cc. Mr. J. Bitchener lYVaitaki). chairman of the Public Petitions Committee, stated that the Racing Bill would have taken a niueii longer time to pass if the clause had not been included under which Cheviot had worked. The agreement between the Racing and Trotting Conference was made prior to 1915, and was not intended to flout the subsequent law, though they were sheltering under it- If the Minister did not assert his right, nothing would be done. The committee's report was adopted-