MORE PERMITS?

Manawatu Times, Volume XLVI, Issue 2729, 23 August 1923, Page 5

MORE PERMITS?

LEGISLATORS DIVIDED.

MR WILFORD’S ADVICE TO BE BRIEF. BRIGHTENING COUNTRY LIFE. (From Our Parliamentary Reporter.) WELLINGTON, Last Night, The debate on the second reading of the Gaming Bill began in the House to-night and it is evident the Bill is to have a rocky passage. Mr Bollard, who moved the second reading, said the intention was that the new permits should go to the country and not to metropolitan clubs, i .Mr Wilford was brief. *‘T think,” he said, "the best way to help this Bill on to the Statute Book is not to talk too long.” Mr Holland said there was no chance of- the Bill passing, such was the opposition to the measure from all sides of the House. He was not personally in favour of the licensing of the bookmaker, but in view of the petition* presented to Parliament they were entitled to have their request tested. He saw no difference in the principle of betting through a bookmaker and betting through a totalisator. We had a condition of affairs in this country where we had placed the Racing Conference above the Supreme Court. Men who had had a conviction against them in the distant past could be ordered off racecourses by private detectives and fined If they did not go.

The Hon. W. D. Stewart said that his experience of 'the Racing Conference was that it was not arbitrary in its application of the rule, but it was very keen to keep the courses clean. Mr Parry expressed surprise that

•ie Bin had not contained a clause which would have the effect of establishing the seven-stone minimum. He complained that some races were run on small courses with crowded fields and there was grave danger.

Mr Isitt said that If Mr Parry would move in the direction of safeguarding the health and lives of jockeys, he would follow him into the lobby. He thought gambling had reached a sufficient volume and further permits would be to the hurt of the Dominion.

Mr Wright said he could not see the difference between betting with the totallsator and betting with the bookmaker. The principle was the same. He was opposed to the proposed increase in permits on the ground that there were already sufficient facilities for gambling. If these permits were granted, there would afterwards be a demand for still more. Was a free hand to be given? Was the attitude to be "let them all come?"

Mr K. S. Williams (Bay of Plenty) Hear, hear.

Mr Edie opposed the Bill and Mr Williams said that as far as betting with the bookmakers was concerned, he thought the law against this was one which the people of New Zealand did not respect, and he did not think they had any intention of carrying it out. He had two sons growing up and he -would like to think that if they were going to have a bet they should be able to do It in the open. Mr Wright: “You are In favour of the licensing of bookmakers?’’ Mr wrilams; "I am in favour of everything being done in open daylight, with the light of the sun on it.” He was not in favour of people spending more than they ought to in gambling, but betting was a trait in the British nation that could not be got over. Mr Hockley regretted that the Racing Commission's report had not been given effect to. An effort should be made to make country life more attractive and the Bill provided a means.