THE GAMING ACT.

Auckland Star, Volume LXVII, Issue 204, 28 August 1936, Page 12

THE GAMING ACT.

AMENDMENT NEEDED. LAW TREATED AYITH CONTEMPT. The repeal of the clauses in the Gaming Act, 1908, which prevent the remitting or telegraphing of investments to the totalisator, the use of the double machine and the publication of dividends, had been strongly urged on successive Governments by the New Zealand Racing Conference, New Zealand Trotting Conference and the Country Clubs _ Association, said Mr. E. W. Alison during the. course of his presidential address at the annual meeting of the Takapuna Jockey Club yesterday, and if this were done he thought it would he most popular, for, not only would it benefit racing clubs and be much appreciated by the racing public, but it would substantially increase the revenue of the Government.

Was it not paradoxical, he asked, that while the legislation provided that the totalisator _ shall be the only legalised means of betting, and that persons betting illicitly were punishable by fine, and. even imprisonment, that the same enactment prohibited the use of the double totalisator? And what had been the result? As they all knew, the law was flouted and treated with contempt. It was defied and flagrantly broken by otherwise law-abiding people. Further, it was common knowledge that through underground channels a greater sum was annually invested with the bookmakers than on the totalisator. Totalisator Investments. The totalisator investments for the past year amounted to - £3,462,366, an increase of £54,254 over the previous year. But while, the exact amount which was invested on the totalisator could be precisely obtained, neither the individual nor collective amounts invested with bookmakers could even approximately be ascertained. They could only be estimated. Statements claimed to be authoritative had been publicly made recently that the annual turnover from bookmakers in New Zealand last racing season far exceeded the amount invested on the totalisator, being variously estimated at between four and eight million pounds. At Dunedin recently a magistrate imposed a fine of £60 upon a bookmaker, whose illegal transaction for one day only amounted to £1100. Racing derived no benefit from fines collected from illegal betting, nor did bookmakers in any way contribute towards the sport from which they gained their livelihood, nor contribute to the Government revenue, excepting perhaps by payment of income tax. There could be no doubt, he added, that the restrictions objected to by racing authorities, and by practically all of the racing community, including the ban on the use of the double totalisator, and upon the farcical non-publication of dividends, should be removed.