The House and the Totalisator

Press, Volume LVII, Issue 17294, 4 November 1921, Page 8

The House and the Totalisator

An examination of the names in the division which extinguished the Givming Amendment Bill reveals that party distinctions were forgotten in the voting. The Leaders of the Liberal and Labour Parties went with Mr Mnssey into the Ayes lobby, but all Mr Holland's supporters, and half of Mr Wilford's, were Noes. This is an interesting if not, when fully considered, an encouraging fact, but it is not so interesting or instructive as the fact that becomes clear when the division list is studied from another point of view—from the point cf view from whidh one may seek for the principle upon which members divided. For it quickly appears, that principle had aotfaLig to do with it. On the surface it might appear that 37 members out of CG declared their hostility to any increase in the number of totalisator permits, yet this majority included not only opponents of racing, but racehorse owners and supporters of racing clubs, and particularly supporters of clubs ivhich would be extinguished if the Rs.cing Commission's report were to takes effect. The Bill was defeated, that is to say—and with the defeat of the Bill, according to Mr Massey, the report of the Commission becomes waste-paper —by a combination of tike opponents of racing with members who are anxious Mat the number of pcrmj'.ts, so far as the clubs they are interested in are concerned, should not be reduced. Needless to say, nobody can have much respect for a decision arrived at through sudh an unprincipled combination as that. It is much to be regretted that the Government; once it had decided to submit to Parliament such, a matter as tho number of j>ermits to be granted, did not adopt the report of the Commission and present it to Parliament a3 the Governments own policy. It could 'hare taken its stand on the ground that if Parliament should pass judgment at all it should base its decision, not upon, the feelingß of these clubs which have been exerting pressure on the members for the districts affected, but upon the 'unbiassed judgment of an expert Commission whose findings,are endorsed by the Racing Conference. The result of. the discussion is not creditable either to the Government or to Parliament. The. cost of the Commission lias' been largely wasted, and the problem it was called in to deal with has beem settled, or temporarily settled, by a combination in wWch principle had no part. The least the Government can do now is to give such effect as ,it cav, in allocating tho permits, to the Commission's report .