PUBLIC RESERVES

Evening Post, Volume CIII, Issue 32, 8 February 1922, Page 4

PUBLIC RESERVES

AN AMENDING BILL

NUMI3ISI! OF-CHARGING DAYS

INCREASED.

Yeslfii-day the Legislative Council passed through iviJ stages the Public lveaerves unc' Domains Amendment Bill, which was i.Vorcducad by Sir Francis Bell. Tho most important provision is or.v increasing from ten t t) fifteen the number of days upon which Ui s - public may ba charged for admission to public reserves and domains. • On the fist reading, Sir Francis Bell explained that the Bill was a very simple measure. There were three main provisions. The first gave the GovernorGeneral power by warrant to increase from ten to twenty tha number of days upon which a charge for admission to a •public reserve eovdd be made. The second provision was thai sites in public domains might be set apart, for public halls, and thr third was intended to exclude bookmakers and undesirables from public reserves used as racecourses. The present law covering the last-mentioned point was not clear. Certain undesirables had claimed tho right of admission to such reserves, and it had not been possible to exclude them. ■ When the Bill was in Committee tho Hon. G. J. Smith inquired who had asked for the increase in tho riumbe'r of charging days, and what was the Governments, reason for . proposing such a charge? Sir Francis Bell said that sports bodie3 had found that the ten days allowed under the present Act were insufficient. Tho Basin Reserve in Wellington, for instance, was specially prepared for the game of cricket, and it was thought to bo only fair that a reasonable increase in the number of charging days should be made, in order that the tours of sports bodies could be properly carried out, The Ministry was of opinion that twenty | days was not an unfair allowance. The ten days now allowed were not sufficient to carry out the purpose for which they were originally granted. The Hon. W. J. Geddis objected to . the increase in tho number of days upon which the public could be charged for admission. The increase proposed meant that a charge could be made every Saturday during the summer. Mr. Smith said lie appreciated the difficulties of the sports bodies, but it was essential to bear in mind that the reserves were for the benefit of the general public. He did not believe that the public should be excluded from "its public heritage" on so many days during the year. , The Hon. G. J. Garland supported Mr. Geddis. He thought it was wrong to exclude the public from the reserves foi 20 days each year. Sir Francis Bell: "What about the ten days?" . ' ; Mr. Garland: "I think ten days is sufficient." He stated that the Auckland City Council had always been tormented by sports bodies and football "rings" for the right to charge for admission, and he had always opposed the granting of such rights. The Hon. Sir Edwin Mitchelson moved an amendment that the number 6t days should be increased to 15 instead of 20. Ten days were not sufficient in Auckland. The Hon. Sir William Hall-Jones protested against the Government's attempt to add ten to the number of da.ys on j which the public.could be excluded from the public reserves. He would vote for tho retention of ten days. ; Sit Francis Bell said he was jjreparsd to accept the amendment. Tho Hon. E. W. Alison said that the amendment appeared to him as one likely to meet the position. The Hon,.E,H. Clark said he did not think it was a very great hardship if the public were called upon to pay for their sport. He Tiad been connected with sports bodies and he knew the difficulties they had as far as finance was concerned. He hoped that the Leader of the Council would stick to the original 28. After Mr. Geddis had protested against the "commercialising" of sport, the amendment increasing the number to 15 was carried. Sir Francis Bell explained that the provision relating to the granting on a domain of a site for a public hal.' was included at the request of domain boards from all over the Dominion. Under the present laws a grandstand could be erectsd, but not a public hall. The Hon. W. H. Triggs suggested that the powers might be even wider than that suggested .by the Leader. Under the Bill, for instance, would it not b» possible to secure the erection of a public hall on Hagley Park, Jhrintchurch? . Sir Francis' Bell: "Yes, if it is a domain. But surely there is a little common-sense left in the community." ■ There was no discussion on the other clauses: . The Bill was reported with amendments, read a third time, and passed.