The Evening Star FRIDAY, JULY 28, 1922. LICENSING LEGISLATION.

Evening Star, Issue 18032, 28 July 1922, Page 4

The Evening Star FRIDAY, JULY 28, 1922. LICENSING LEGISLATION.

Probably the bulk of the electors had forgotten until this week that parliament ary investigation of the liquor trade had been going on. The report of the special committee of members which Mr Hockly, the chairman, tabled yesterday in the House, will at least servo as a reminder of the many changes there have been in legislation since the big Act of 1904, as well as an indication that the need for further changes is recognised. In view of Mr Massey’s declaration that no licensing legislation will be introduced this session, tho recommendations contained in the report have this as their chief value: that they point to the inequitable conditions in which the referendum will be taken at tho end of this year. As the law now stands, should National Prohibition then be carried, it would come into force at the end of June, 1925. That would be giving the trade a little over sis months in which to wind up its affairs and efface itself. Previous legislation allowed it four years, Such a period would undoubtedly be a severe strain on the natience of zealots who have devoted a lifetime to the elimination of the drink traffic; but the six months’ interval goes to the other extreme. It is rather a matter for surprise that tho committee did not recommend a compromise here" allowing a stay of two years between tho ukase and its execution, instead of reversion to the four years. The reason given for preference for the longer term is to “make it possible for licensees to provide additional accommodation where necessary without risk of personal loss.” This goes at once to the heart of developments that have taken place in tho trade, which were always there with the four years’ respite under a three-fifths majority decision, but which have become more pronounced under tho six months’ respite after what is not far removed from/a hare majority decision. The keeping or taking of an hotel has become more or less of a gamble. Although the expression of opinion at tire periodical polls has steadily grown in favor of Prohibition, tho habits of tho people show no corresponding movement. The consumption of liquor has increased. There is money to he made in the keeping of an hotel. Trade generally may bo dull at present, and the publican suffers to some extent through the reduced amount of money in circulation. But, taking an average over the years since the armistice, New Zealand’s drink bill has been big. With tho threat of sudden extinction hanging over the trade, those engaged in it have been tempted to make every post a winning post and get out in time. Even now there are always others to be found willing to take their place and do tho same thing. Some have the necessary capital, and some have not, but arc able to secure the necessary backing at a price. Thus it comes about that there has been great trafficking in licenses, big payments for goodwill, and a large number of tied houses.

. Certain evils follow,; in the train of such instability, and the committee suggests that they be tackled in two ways—the direct and the indirect. The longer security of tenure constitutes the latter way. and by way of direct attack there is making of receipt of a sum for goodwill by the outgoing licensee a punishable offence, the scrutiny of all leases by the chairman of the Licensing Committee (particularly with a view to preventing the tied house), and the insistence on an interval of throe years between the transfers of any license, unless in exceptional circumstances, It is sheer guesswork to state exactly how workable these direct methods would, prove in practice, and the proviso that there should be a Ministerial veto on tho actions of licensing committees appears a wise one, for their powers are already considerable, and big extension of them is proposed. There appears to be an impression on the part of the parliamentary committee that a good deal remains to be remedied in the conduct of hotels, since it recommends, apart from the ordinary police supervision, the appointment of inspectors and subordinates for this special purpose. Apparently this rather unwelcome departure from the principle of reducing rather than adding to the number of those in the Public Service, especially the array of inspectors, would not bo an additional charge on the country, if the committee’s proposal to base the annual licensing fees on an hotel’s bar takings wore adopted. At present there is a. flat rate—£4o a year when the hotel is in a borough or town district, and £25 if outside, or £2O for an accommodation license—the proceeds going to the local authorities. In tho event of a change, those latter would collect what they do at present, but the Government would take the surplus. Complaints of had honor are not frequent in Dunedin, but apparently tho position is less satisfactory elsewhere, and this is the committee’s plan for galvanising a largely inoperative provision in existing legislation. Altogether the report strikes one as a kind of prospectus of a better regulated business in the event of Continuance being carried next December, directed chiefly to the man who is not an abstainer, but who wonders whether lie would not be better off in health and pocket if he were forced to be, and on whoso vote in the aggregate tho issue will turn.