DISTRIBUTION OF PROFITS Concern At Efforts To Change System

Press, Volume CVI, Issue 31123, 28 July 1966, Page 5

DISTRIBUTION OF PROFITS Concern At Efforts To Change System

“I am greatly concerned with the repeated efforts of administrators and associates of the sister sport of galloping to change the basis of distribution of T.A.B. profits”, said Mr T. A. Leitch, retiring president of the Canterbury Park Trotting Club, in his report at the club’s annual meeting at Addington Raceway yesterday.

Mr Leitch told members that the distribution of T.A.B. profits had become a most necessary part of all clubs’ income and went a long way towards meeting their ever increasing costs.

“I have no quarrel with the board’s new basis, based on a separate racing and trotting pool, but I find myself unable to accept any grounds for the argument that it should be on off-course turn-over only,” said Mr Leitch. Mr Leitch said there was, in fact, only one pool as all investments, whether from Kaitaia, Bluff or from any window on a racecourse, were registered on the totalisator of the club conducting the meeting. The Totalisator Agency Board was purely an exension of the on-course facilities. “Surely the name of the Totalisator Agency Board means exactly what it says—that is, an agency of the totalisator,” said Mr Leitch. “How anyone could suggest that distribution be on any basis other than total turn-over surprises me. “The club conducting the meeting, not the Totalisator Agency Board, was responsible for the payment of all

totalisator tax on the whole of the turn-over and at no stage, be it for taxation purposes or the calculation of dividends, was the pool div ided,” said Mr Leitch. “Why, then, was it considered necessary to have two pools when discussing totalisator turnover or T.A.B. distribution of profits.” Mr Leitch told members that the club’s share of the distribution of profits from the T.A.B. this year amounted to £13,843 14s 2d.