GAMING ACT

Hawera Star, Volume XLIX, 28 August 1929, Page 5

GAMING ACT

BETTING FACILITIES. PROPOSED EXTENSION. j DISCUSSION IN THE HOUSE. {iiy Telegraph—Press Association.) WELLINGTON, Aug. 27. The Hon. J. B. Donald, in the House of Representatives to-day, submitted the report of the M to Z Committee recommending the Gaming Act petition for favourable consideration. Mr H. T. Armstrong said be hoped it was not being seriously suggested that the telegraph offices should be turned into agencies for the tot-ali-sator. If it was intended to submit such legislation to the House be predicted it would have the roughest passage of the session. .Sir George Hunter expressed pleasure with the terms of the report. Mr F. Langstone protested that ordinary telegraph business would be delayed by the multitude of betting messages that might concentrate on the post office in a smalL town at which a race meeting was 'being held. The gambling element in New Zealand was growing, and the proposed alterations to the law would render the position worse. He moved that the report be referred back to the committee for further consideration. The Rev. C. Carr seconded the amendment. He said he and certain other members of the M to Z Committee had been prevented by urgent business from attending the meeting of tlie committee which had adopted the recommendation. He personally would not have voted for it. He contended there was a. vast section of public opinion against the amendment of the Gaming Act. _ The churches at any rate were against the proposal. Mr F. Lye said the people who wanted to bet bv telegraph could not call themselves sports. They were merely trying to get something for nothing.. He had no objection to the publication of dividends. Mr W. D. Lysnar said he was in favour of legalising what was to-day an illegal traffic. Every section of the community was indulging in betting, and he considered the evil would be less if the proposed legislation were passed. He suggested the Government should take up the Gaming Amendment Bill and' pilot it through. Mr H. S. S. Kyle said he would like to see the Bill passed, if only to remove the ban on euchre tournaments. Mr D. G. Sullivan said he could see no justification for the Bill. If the pest office was to he used' for the transmission of a bet the sporting element of the het would he eliminated 1 . Even if the Gaming Amendment Bill were passed he considered there would still , ibe the same amount of illegal betting, and the telegraphing of bets would provide additional temptation. THE BOOKMAKER. Mr H. R. Jenkins said he would support the -amendment. The State had its remedy against betting with the bookmaker, and he thought the police should carry out their duties more thoroughly in this respect, thereby reducing the number of bookmakers. At the present time the bookmakers were only occasionally fined, and 1 it was well known that on those occasions their club or association paid the fine. Mr H. G. Dickie (Patea) said he could see no objection to the telegraphing of bets when it was known that the post office was at the present time being used in the interest of bookmakers. Mr H. G. R. Mason said increased facilities for betting would flow from the new provisions, -and he considered ' this would not he in the interests of 1 the country. Mr T. Makitanara said gambling would go on for ever and it was a waste of time to try to stop- it. He held no brief for the bookmaker, but as betting in that quarter existed it should be regulated l and conducted through the proper channels'. He would have more, to say on this phase of the subject when Ms amendment relating to bookmakers was before the House. Mr A. M. Samuel submitted that the committee’s work had been done faithfully and well, and that it was entitled to have its recommendations adopted. Mr J. S. Fletcher expressed the belief 1 that the investigations into the subject had not 'been sufficiently thorough and. that all aspects of the subject bad not been given due consideration. There were two points in particular to which he would like to. draw attention ; they were the cost of extra, telegraph operators that would have to be employed and the danger of urgent race telegrams delaving business' messages. PLEBISCITE SUGGESTED. Mr R. A. Wright said it had been suggested the people should be given an opportunity of voting on this issue, and he agreed with this- view. He 'admitted that gambling could not be abolished, ‘but he said it should be restricted. He thought the recommendation should be referred back to the committee, .as it was not customary for a committee to submit a recommendation on wliat lie considered was a- matter of policy. Mr R. Semple objected to the waste of time discussing spoil a subject when the country was waiting for more important legislation. Mr H. E. Holland said if facilities had been given to the opponents of the Bill to submit their views he would not vote lor the amendment, but if the opponents had not been given an opportunity to appear before the committee he considered the matter should be referred back to it. In his opinion there were worse forms of gambling than racing. He thought the Stock Exchange 'was the worst form of all. Mr Holland considered he was in the unique position of being the only member of the House, who did not bet. and personally he would like to see gambling abolished from sport. It seemed to him the only man who was entitled to object to the Bill was the man who did not bet —himself. He sympathised with the churches in their attitude.. However, as tilings stood, there seemed to he some anomalies'. Xew Zealand dividends were published in Australian newspapers and sold in New Zeaalnd bookstalls without penalty. Further, if it was wrong to publish a dividend, surely it was wrong that there shou'ld be a dividend. It had also to be remembered that bookmakers used the post office at the present time. I Mr G. C. Munns agreed 1 that it would be impossible to eliminate betting, but there seemed to. be a _damger of the country becoming “racing mad.” The Government might find itself faced with the necessity to curtail the number of race dayc per vear. Inquiries bv stewards and other incidents supported the view that racing was becoming a business to-dnv, and the “poor silly public.” had to pay. If it were possible to telegraoh bets it would he placing “information into the hands of the telegraph emtiovees, who might he tempted to het where otherwise they would not have been interested. The discussion had not concluded when the House adjourned at 5.30 p.m. land the report was “talked out.”