GAMING BILL.

Press, Volume LX, Issue 18138, 30 July 1924, Page 9

GAMING BILL.

MOTION FOR INTRODUCTION. DEBATE NOT FINISHED. (PBXtta ASSOCIATION TKI.*OBiSf ) WELLINGTON, July 29. In the House of Representatives this afternoon, on the motion for leave to j introduce the Gaming Act Amendment j Bill, Mr Parry desired to know whether the Bill met certain anomalies pointed out during the last session. The B:!l should be sent to a committee, before whom everyone connected with racing, from the horye-owner down to the man who made bets with bookmakers, could come and give evidence. There was also the constitution of the Racing Conference, about which certain statements seemed to indicate there was something wrong, so far as representation u'.-is concerned. He objected to having to deal with the Bill in the dark. Ho protested against publishing certain handicaps in books and subsequently altering them. No doubt theso changes were put upon a blackboard, but the average person on the racecourse did not know that, and procscded to pick winners on weights which did not exist. He quoted the case of the Onslow Stakes, at the Auckland meeting, where 93Jib overweight was distributed amongst thirteen out of twentyfour horses. Mr Savage condemned the practice of making jockeys ride at 6st 71b. This weight was totally against the dictates of Nature, and created the anomaly that while Dr. Truby King and others were seeking to build up a nation of stalwart men, the Jockey Clubs were trying to sweat them down to paper weights. The condition of the courses and tin: size of the fields were other matters which required grave consideration, because the lives'of those taking pare in races were often jeopardised bv the overcrowding of tho fields. "Mr Lee objected to Racing Clubs monopolising any more Saturdays and Labour Day. This was contrary to the best interest of . other forms of sport in which the best manhood of the country were engaged. Mr Langstone urged the redistribution of race meetings. Racing was being centralised in the interests of several racing magnates. This, and other phases of racing, required looking into, and unless this was done the Government and Minister in charge of t.ho Bill were going to have a pretty hot time. The measure should bo submitted to a Parliamentary Committee for consideration. Mr Monteith contended that better arrangements should be made for medical attendance on racecourses in case of accident. Jockeys should have tl>e right of representation on Appeal Boards which held their -livelihood in their hands. Racing, as conducted in New Zealand, was not breeding a class of hbrse notable for their standard. They f wero nothing but a lot of sixfurlong squibs. Mr McKeen said the Racing Conference was one of the most autocratic bodies in tho country, and racing ought to be taken out of its hands. . Mr Sullivan and Mr Isitt expressed the hope that no attempt would be made in the Bill to increase racing permits. , Mr Isitt also urged a new commission to redistribute permits with greater regard for the interests of country districts than at> present prevails. The debate was not concluded when the House adjourned at SJiO, and the Bill was not introduced. •