House of Representatives.

King Country Chronicle, Volume V, Issue 315, 26 November 1910, Page 5

House of Representatives.

The House met at 2.30 p.m. A report of the managers appointed to confer with the Legislative Council regarding the amendments made by the Council in the Gaming Bill was received. The managers recommended that the amendments made by the Council be agreed to, subject to Che following further amendments: Clause 2, providing penalties \ for street betting, is amended verbally, by substituting the word "or" for "in" in the first line of sub-scction 3, and by inserting after "racecourse" the following words: "whether a race meeting is being held there or not." Clause 4. which provides for racingclubs preventing bookmakers plying their calling on racecourses, is amended by striking out the word "person" and substituting "bookmaker." Subsection 2 of clause 5, giving preference to clubs using the totailsator only once yearly in the grantingof licenses, struck out by the Council, is reinserted with an amendment that in place of "preference shall be given to" the following words are inserted: "consideration shall be given to the claims thereof." Sir J. G. Ward moved that the report be adopted. Mr T. E. Taylor moved as an amendment "with ' the exception of the alteration made in sub-saction 2 of clause 6, providing that not more than eight races shall be run on any one day at any race meeting" (as the Bill left the House the number of races in the sub-clause was seven). .Mr Taylor said that in the opinion of experienced men a bookmaker was not abolished by the provisions oc the Bill. There was no power to prevent him betting at Tattersall's Clubs and in premises rented by himself. The profession of a bookmaker was not outlawed. He was not so much concerned about bookmakers' evils as about the totalisator, which had quadrupled betting in the community. Mr Massey said it was not a question of seven or eight races, but whether the House should agree with amendments made by the Council in the Gaming Bill. Unless the Upper House agreed to the decision of the House of Representatives, the Bill would be lost. He desired to see it pass, if only because it repealed the existing law, providing for the registration of bookmakers.

The Hon. J. A. Millar said the Bill embodied a principle which was not found in any law in other parts of the world. It made betting illegal, except on the totalisator. More money changed hands at card playing in New Zealand than went through the totalisator. The Bill had neither principle nor logic in it. Betting was either right or wrong. If wrong, it ought not to be permitted in any form. He had always supported the totalisator, but was now inclined to change his ground. He would like to see the Bill held over, and the opinion of the country taken upon it, when the bookmaker and the totalisator would both go. Sir J. G. Ward said Hon. Millar's views were not those of the Government, but his own. If the amendment was carried, and the Council disagreed with it, the Bill would be lost. That would mean that the House allied itself with tho«e desiring to kill the Bill. He desired to make it perfectly clear that the Government desired the Bill to go upon the Statute Book".

Mr Poland entered a protest against the amendments made by the Council in the Bill. A number of other members spoke on the question, and on a division the amendment was negatived by 52 votes to 18. The House met in the evening. The debate on the report of the conference on the Gaming Bill was resumed. Mr Poland moved that the report be adopted with the exception of the amendment made in sub-section 2 clause 5, which originally gave preference to cluii.s using the totalisator once a year in the granting of permits. After some discussion the amendment was negatived by 49 to 20. The Public Works Bill was further considered in committee and the Imprest Supply Bill was passed. The House rose at 2 a.m.