LICENSING BILL.

Press, Volume LXIII, Issue 19153, 9 November 1927, Page 11

LICENSING BILL.

SIX-YEARLY POLLS. TWO-ISSUE BALLOT PAPER 55 PER CENT. MAJORITY. [THE PRESS Special Servlco.] WELLINGTON. November 9. The Licensing Amendment Bill wag introduced in the House of Representatives this afternoon. The . was sponsored by the Prime Minister, who explained, however, that it was not a Party measure.

The principal changes proposed are six-yearly polls, elimination of the State Control issue on the ballot paper, and the substitution of a 55 per cent, majority for a bare majority to carry Prohibition, or, after Prohibition has been carried, to restore licenses.

Introducing the Bill, the Prime Minister made the following statement: "This Bill, which has just been introtrodueed by Governor-General's message, represents the fulfilment of an undertaking given by me ,to the House, as well as to many delegations which have waited upon me from time to time, that- an opportunity would bo given in this Parliament for consideration of the licensing question.

"As is well-known, the licensing question is one which lias always been treated as a matter outside ordinary Party politics; that is to say, members of Parliament have always had a free hand in recording their opinions and convictions in regard to any licensing legislation which may come before the House. There is no intention whatever of departing from this custom in the present instance, and, as far as members on the Government side of the House are concerned, they are quite unfettered by any Party ties in their consideration of the proposals which are submitted in this measure- The Bill, therefore, is in no sense a Government measure. The proposals are the outcome of my own consideration of the question, and I submit them in the hope that they contain features calculated to give a lead upon questions which occupy foremost place 'in the minds of those who study our social and economic life. The Ballot Paper. "In making this statement, I should like to refer to my own personal position in regard to certain views expressed by me at last general election. I then stated that I wfis in favour of the three issue ballot paper. The Bill now before the House eliminates the third issue, that is, the State Control issue. Careful consideration and examination of the figures recorded for what is known as the third issue, namely, State Control, have led me to the conclusion that its existence can hardly be justified as it is not a live issue. At the same time, to ensure that a drastic change, such as the carrying of national Prohibition would involve, should have a stable majority in its favour, the Bill provides for not less than 55 per cent, of the total votes recorded at the licensing poll, as being necessary to carry national Prohibition. It is also advisable that, if Prohibition is carried, it should not be reversed, except by a stable majority. The elimination of the third issue in the ballot paper, the institution of the 55 per cent, majority, and the substitution of the licensing polls at every alternate general election in place of the present triennial polls are among the chief features of the provisions of the Bill. "As members will recollect, a Bill was submitted to the House last year, but I cannot say that its reception generally was encouraging. On [the contrary, its proposals seemed to be unwanted, and the present proposals are submitted in the belief that they are worthy of very careful consideration by Parliament."

A Tew Details. The brief discussion that took place in the House following the introduction of the Bill indicated a great divergence of opinion, and the certainty that several of the proposals will be fiercely contested,, especially by the Prohibitionists. In reply to a preliminary question, Mr Coates made a running commentary on the main provisions of the Bill. He said: "It contains many amendments that were proposed last year. There are also points and leaders for the House when dealing with the Bill later on. It makes provision for the frequency of polls. It gives the House an opportunity of considering the point as to whether the polls should be taken every three years or every alternate three years." Mr McCombs (Lyttelton): Which is in the Bill?

The Prime Minister: It gives that opportunity. Mr H. T. Armstrong (Christchurch East): The same as last year? The Prime Minister: Not the same as last year. The next point is a direction in regard to the Licensing Committees. In the event of extensions, the Committees are directed to take into account the necessary accommodation for the locality before granting the license. (Hear, hear.) The Committees are also given more power in regard to licensees. The Bill makes provision for a two issue ballot paper, cutting out State Control. Mr H. Atmore (Nelson): Was the Government committed.to that? The Prime Minister: I will make a short statement later on which will explain that point. (The statement to which Mr Coates refers is printed above.) "Is it to be a bare majority?" asked (Wellington Central). The Prime Minister: No, fifty-five forty-five. Mr Lvsnar (Gisborne): Is there anything to counteract that? The Prime Minister: If you will read the Bill you will find it both interest ing and instructive. Mr Lvsnar: That is not very interesting—that bit. (Laughter.)

Mr McCombs Leads Attack. Mr McCombs (Lyttelton) said the Bill was being brought down very late in the session. He hoped this did not indicate that the Government intended conveniently to drop it. No doubt if it did not satisfy tne House it could conveniently be dropped. An hon. member: Like the Gaming Bill! Mr McCombs said the Alliance was not asking for special privileges. It was asking for justice—in other words, equality of voting in regard to licensing matters. They wanted a removal of the present handicap. The trade, on the other hand, was hoping to get at least a retention of the present law, which was the equivalent to thein of 39.200 votes, and a handicap to those who wanted to see reform of 39,200 votes. The people who were asking for reform were handicapped under the existing law to the extent of 39.200 votes. They asked for the removal of that handicap. Now members were asked to remove that by giving a two issue ballot paper—a handicap under the Bfll of 67,5001 The ceply of tba

Government to the demand for justice was to increase the handicap by 28,300 vows. That was not the issue at the last election, and there would be indignation at what was proposed in the Bill. The Government were treating with contempt :i large body of electors, who were not asking for favours, but for simple justice. The Alliance was asking for a free and unfettered vote at the election. It was seeking the welfare of the people. Speaking during the committal stage of the introduction of the Bill, Mr McCombs said what the Government was proposing was to increase tbo handicap l>y 72 per cent Ho asked at whose request this handicap had been placed in the Bill. He admitted that the Prime Minister was in a difficult position. He asked the Prime Minister if he would be prepared to repeat the promise he gave to a deputation before this session opened — that the House would bo given every opportunity to come to a decision in the matter. If this promise was given, they would have nothing to complain about, in so far as the Prime Minister was concerned. The Alliance asked for no privileges nor favours. It wanted equity and justice, an unfettered vote, and the removal of an unfair handicap. Sir Apirana Ngata (Eastern Maori) asked that the 20,000 Maori electors should be given some voice in the liquor question. If, as had happened in the past, the fate of the Government of the day had lveen determined by the Maori vote through one of their representatives in the House, it was logical that the Maori should have a vote in the minor issue of the liquor question. Mr W. J. Jordan (Manukau) considered that the two issue ballot paper, loaded on one side, would come as a •shock to the people, who would not accept it. He suggested that there should be some system of indicating the preferences of those who voted for State Control.

"I fim going to protest right away ngaijist my rifrlit to vote for State Control being taken aw'av without a mandate from the people," said Mr Wilford (Hutt), who also intimated that his Control vote was in favour of Continuance, against Prohibition, He intended to use all his powers to keep in State Control, or to have a referendum taken. Accommodation in Hotels. Mr Forbes (Hurunui) asked whether the Bill had been raised by the Reform caucus. (Laughter.) The House should be told at the outset whether the measure was a serious piece of legislation, backed by the Government Party, and worth while devoting attention to, or whether it was merely a "kite." Touching the licensing question generally, Mr Forbes emphasised the necessity for adequate hotef accommodation being provided by licensees; who should be made to realise their responsibilities in the matter. As long as the present system of tenure remained, however it would be impossible to secure that improved accommodation.

Mr Lysnar: Yes, that's the whole trouble.

Mr Forbes contended that licensees should have some security of tenure. If it were not the Government's serious intention to place the Bill on the Statute Book, members could act accordingly. A sham fight at the present juncture was only a waste of time. Mr R. AV. Smith (Waitnarino) expressed disappointment that no provision was incorporated for a referendum to determine whether there should be a licensing poll in the King Country by which the people of that territory could decide for themselves whether they should have licenses or not. He appealed to the Prime Minister to see to it that the point raised be considered when the Bill reached its Committee stage. Mr J. C. Rolleston (Waitomo) supported the request of Mr Smith. Mr Atmore contended that the Government was on a fishing expedition, and that the Bill was not intended to go on.

The Postmaster-General (Mr Nosworthy): It might hook you. Mr Atmore said that the PostmasterGeneral had lost his constituency, and was thinking, not about that electorate, but about "another place." "I might land in Nelson," replied the Minister with a smile.

Mr Atmore: Yon would soon be deported. We would give you some of your own medicine. (Laughter.)

An Agreement?

Mr Atmore said there was great talk as to whether an agreement had been entered into between the real interests on the liquor question. Mr Lvsnar: There was an agreement. Mr Atmore: Oh, don't interrupt! Mr Harris (Waitemata): There was no agreement. Mr Atmore suggested that the Government had no intentioii of putting the Bill through. He objected to the the State Control Issue being deleted without those voters having a say in the subject. Mr H. G. R. Mason (Eden) asked the Government to consider giving the wine-growere a longer period to wind up their business if Prohibition was carried. Six months might be all right as far as licensed houses were concerned. but it was too short for those interested in the Dominion's wine industry.

Prime Minister Replies. Replying to the debate, the Prime Minister predicted that there would be many amendments to the Bill introduced by members, and some of them would affect no-license districts, • which had since been merged into licensed areas. He had been approached on these questions, but he had not been able to see his way to incorporate anything to that effect in the Bill. He was not aware whether an agreement had been made with respect to liquor in the King Country, he could find no evidence of it. "Oh, that business is all a myth, interjected Mr Lvsnar. The Prime Minister: I don t know that the matter can be disposed of in those words.

Mr Lysnar: Yes, it can. The Prime Minister: "I am not so certain of that. "As far as I am concerned," adcled the Prime Minister, "we will stay here until Christmas provided we can get this thing thrashed out and reach some satisfactory solution. In no sense is it a Government measure. It has not been before & caucus, neither have 1 consulted my colleagues in regard to the details of the Bill. I felt it was impossible for me to consult anyone. It was a matter for someone to bring down a Bill, which in his judgment gave definite leads for the expression of opinions. Every member of the Government Party will have a free hand." It was all very well for Mr Atmore, said the Prime Minister, to suggest that the Government could not agree, but the member for Nelson did not have the question to face which the Prime Minister was compelled to meet. Perhaps also it was not so difficult for Mr Atmore to pet his Party together. Mr Atmore: It's all right, you will be that way soon. Sir Maui Pomare: You are a bad prophet. (Laughter.) The Prime Minister: We never know what is going to happen to us. and 1 am not going to boast about what is going to happen to us. lam trying my hardest to keep the flag flying. (Hear, hear.) As to the question raised by Sir Aparima Ngata, Mr Smtih, and Mr Kolleston, Mr Coates said he had not introduced those controversial questions. but if such amendments were submitted to the House ample opportunity would bo given to consider them. Th« BJH read & -first