GAMING LAW

Manawatu Standard, Volume XLIX, Issue 230, 28 August 1929, Page 4

GAMING LAW

DEBATE IN PARLIAMENT.

VARYING OPINIONS EXPRESSED

Per Press Association. WELLINGTON, Aug. 27. In tho House of Representatives this afternoon Mr T. W. McDonald (Wairarapa) submitted tho report of tho M to Z committee recommending the gaming petitions for favourable consideration. The petition was in support of tlie publication of dividends and the telegraphing of totalisator investments. Mr Armstrong (Christchurch East) said he hoped it was not being seriously suggested that telegraph offices should be turned into agencies for the . totalisator. If it was intended to submit such legislation to tho House ho predicted that it would have tho roughest passage of the session. Sir George Hunter (Waipawa) expressed pleasure with tho terms of the report. Mr F. Langstone (Waimarino) 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. Rev. C. Carr (Timaru) seconded the amendment'. He stated that he and certain other members of the M to Z committee had been prevented by urgent business from attending the meeting of the committee which had adopted tho recommendation. He personally would not have voted for it. Ho contended that there was a vast section of public opinion against anv amendment of the Gaming Act. The churches at any rate were against tho proposal. Mr Lye (Waikato) said'people who wanted to bet by telegraph could not call themselves sports. They were merely trying to get something for nothing. He had no objection to tho publication of dividends. Mr Lysnar (Gisborne) said he was in favour of legalising what was today an illegal traffic. _ Every section of the community was indulging in betting and he considered that the evil would be less if the proposed legislation were passed. He suggested that the Government should take up the Gaming Amendment Bill and pilot it through. Mr Kyle (Riccarton) said he would like to see the bill passed if only to remove the ban on euchre tournaments. Mr Sullivan ([Avon) said he could see no justification for the bill. If the Post Office was to be used for the transmission of bets the sporting element of the bets would be eliminated. Even if tho Gaming Amendment Bill were passed he considered there would still be the same amount of illegal betting and telegraphing bets would provide an additional temptation. Mr Jenkins (Parnell) said he would support tho 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 tlie number of bookmakers. At the present time bookmakers were onlv occasionally fined and it was well known that on those occasions their club or association paid the fine.

Mr Dickie (Patea) said he could not see any objection to telegraphing bets when it w r as known that the Post Office was at the present time used in the interests of the bookmakers.

Mr Mason (Auckland Suburbs) said increased facilities for betting would flow from the new provisions and he considered this would not be in the interests of the country. Mr Makitanara (Southern Maori) said that gambling would go on for ever and it was a wmste of time to ti-y to stop it. He held no brief for the bookmaker, but as betting in that quarter existed it should bo regulated and conducted through the proper channels. Ho would have more to say on this phase of tho subject when his amendment relating to bookmakers ■was before the House.

Mr Samuel (Thames) submitted that ’ tho committee’s work had been done faithfully and well and it was entitled ■ to have its recommendation adopted. Mr Fletcher (Grey Lynn) expressed the belief that the investigation into 1 the subject had not been sufficiently thorough and all aspects of the subject ; had not been given due consideration. There were two points in particular to ; which he would like to draw attention 1 and they were the cost of extra telegraph operators who would have to be employed and the danger of urgent race telegrams delaying business messages. 1 Mr Wright (Wellington Suburbs) said it had been suggested the people should be given the opportunity of voting on this issue and ho agreed with this view. He admitted that gambling could not be abolished, but 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 what was considered to be a matter of policy. Mr Semple (Wellington East) objected to the waste of time discussing such a subject when the country was waiting for more important legislation. Mr H. E. Holland (Buller) said that if tho facilities had been given to tho opponents of the bill to submit their views he would not vote for tho amendment, but if the opponents had not been given tho opportunity to appear before tho committee he considered the matter should be referred back to it. In his opinion there J were worse forms of gambling than i racing. He thought the Stock Exchange was tho worst form of all. He considered that 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 that the only man who was entitled to object to the bill was the man who did not. bet himself. He ! sympathised with the churches ini their attitude. However, as tilings 1 stood there seemed to be some anomalies. New Zealand dividends were I published in Australian newspapers I and sold in New Zealand bookstalls' witlrout penalty. Further, if it was wrong to publish a dividend surelv it was wrong that there should be a divi-

dend. It had also to be remembered that bookmakers used the Post Office at the present time. Mr Munro (Dunedin North) agreed that it would be impossible to eliminate betting, but there seemed to be a danger of tire country becoming “racing mad.” The Government might find itself faced with the necessity of curtailing the number of race days ]>er year. Inquiries by stewards and other incidents supported the view that racing was becoming a business to-day and the “poor silly public” had to pay. Jf it were possible to telegraph bets it would be placing “information” in tire hands of telegraph employees who might be tempted to bet where otherwise they would not have been interested. The discussion had not concluded when the House adjourned at 5.30 and the report was talked out.