DOG RACING

Dominion, Volume 21, Issue 190, 14 May 1928, Page 10

DOG RACING

BILL PROVIDING CONTROL IN BRITAIN TRACKS TO BE LICENSED (Australian Press Assn.—United Service.) London. May 11. Tn lhe House of Commons, Mr. John Buchan (C.). moving the second reading of the Dog Racing Bill, requiring all tracks to be licensed by local authorities. said that a strong case could be made for dog-racing as an interesting sport, but no case could be made against local control. Municipalities were tlie best judges of tlie well-being of their own areas. Tlie cardinal point was that greyhound-raqing had increased betting, and’ it had become an enormous financial interest with over lid) registered companies with several millions of cr.pitr.l. One of tin- guarantees that profits wotil'l be earned was facilities for mass betting. Though betting, was an ancient, ineradicable human instinct, this did not remove tlie objections to the artificial creation of large-scale opportunities for it, thrusting temptation on (lie classes least able to sustain losses. Unless the sport were regulated it would drift into a chain of tracks throughout the country. The sport, was just beginning, and its ultimate development could not be foreseen. They must harmonise it witli tlie public interest while yet there was time. Sir F. Meyer, moving the rejection of the Bill, objected to attempts to raise tlie moral tone by repressive legislation. AVhy should greyhound-racing lie singled out from other sports? Tlie local authorities had not controlled horse-racing, pony-racing, coursing, whippet-racing, football, cricket, ami boxing. He was not pretending that greyhound-racing was possible without betting, but' there* was an enormous amount of betting on professional Association football. Air. J. H. Thomas (Lab.) said that nobody enjoyed horse-racing more than himself, but. since greyhound-racing started lie had not attended a horse race. Mr. Thomas said.that he associated with and approved of all kinds of sport as healthy recreation, but lie was opposed to greyhound-racing, which was considered bad for the working class. He strongly favoured a veto by local authorities. Sir R. Hamilton (L.) said that a local Press plebiscite by his constituency resulted in 14,000 postcards in favour and only one against the Bill. The Home Secretary, Sir AV. JoynsonIlicks, said that the only question was whether the sport ought to be controlled. He had been inundated with correspondence on tlie subject, and had received 3600 resolutions against greyhoundracing, and very few in favour. He had seen many deputations. So long as tlie sport was properly conducted for sport, s sake, he saw no reason against it. On the contrary, if it were a cloak for gambling, it was a matter for Parliament's consideration whether it should be stopped. He was not prepared to go to that length. The Government had decided to leave the matter to a free vote. Personally lie supported the Bill. The Bill was read a second time by 222 votes to 18. An attempt to refer it to a Select Committee was defeated by ISS votes to 30.