GENERAL ASSEMBLY.

Otago Daily Times, Issue 15825, 25 July 1913, Page 6

GENERAL ASSEMBLY.

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.

(Per United Peess-Association,) WELLINGTON, July 24. The House met at 2.30 p.m. . LEAVE OF ABSENCE Dr Te Rangihiroa was granted seven days' leave of absence. NEW BILLS. • The Foxton Harbour Board Loan Bill (Mr Robertson) and the Borough of Moniington Tramways Act Amendment Bill (Mr Statham) were read a first time. .ARCHITECTS' BILL. • A committee wa6 set up to consider the Architects', Bill. PREMIUM BONDS. The Premium Bonds Validation Bill was read a second'time pro forma. The Mover of the Bill'- (Mr HARRIS) then moved to set up trie following committee to consider the Bill Messrs R. Bollard, Buddo, Clark, Ell, Mander, Millar, Myers, Statham, Veitch, and Harris.

The motion was opposed by Mr ISITT, who submitted that the • House would establish a very dangerous precedent if it allowed a special commitee to consider the matter.

The Hon. Mr MASSEY said he did not know the views of one member of the committee, nor did he know the promoters of the Bill, but he did know that there were thousands of people in New Zealand who were interested in premium bonds, and who were debarred from

getting money which they had put into the concern owing to a decision of the Supreme Court.

I Mr WILFORD said it would be a more proper thing to legalise Tattersall's sweeps than premium bonds. He believed that premium bonds were the greatest sample of the confidence trick ever brought into the country. Mr RUSSELL asked if the House was going to stultify itself by allowing the matter to go through in, the face of the gambling legislation of the country. He agreed with Mr Wilford that Tattersall's sweeps were preferable to premium bonds. The movement was more pernicious than anything ever brought before Parliament. There were four Auckland members on the committee., Mr PAYNE explained the working of the premium bonds. The bonds were issued by the City of Paris and other corporations at per cent., 2£ per cent, of which was payable on the surrender of the coupon. , One and a-half per cent, was allowed to accrue and was gambled 1 for by lottery periodically, The other \ per cent, went into a sinking fund for the repayment of the loan. He was strongly opposed to the House allowing the matter to go through, a 6 it was nothing less than a Huge, pernicious gamble promoted by, one firm only. Mr ATMORE protested against the business of the country being held up by an attempt by one firm to introduce an insidious form of gambling, which would

drain the pockets of the masses. The Hon. Mr HKERIES contended that the promoter of the Bill had been led into a trap by some members of the House in order to kill his Bill. He thought that such procedure was unfair, and that the House was acting with great

discourtesy in not giving the member foi Wait-emata his committee.

Mr PEARCB and Mr NOSWORTHY supported the setting up of a committee to .investigate the matter, but said they were totally opposed to the legalising of the premium bonds. The former said he thought they were more pernicious

than Tattcrsall's sweeps. Mr M'CALLUM moved as an amendment that the Bill go before the Public Accounts Committee. Mr HARRIS said he regretted that the matter had been treated by the Opposition with such bitter party feeling. He stated that premium bonds were held Qy many thousands of people in New Zealand. As a matter of. fact, there were over 8000 holders. Premium bonds were not a gamble, bat a gilt-edged security. The Crown Prosecutor, in a case before the Supreme Court, had stated that the. Crown did not contend that the purchaser did not get value for his money. His object in setting up his committee was to gfet. members who were conversant with the subject. A company had been formed in Auckland with a capital of £42,000. Mr YOUNG: How much paid up? Mr PAYNE; No liabilities? Mr HARRIS said the company liad received an opinion, from Sir J. 'I Findlay, when the Ward Government was in powCT, that the company's business was legal, and that it could go on unmolested. He did not care twopence about the company, but he was concerned about the thousands of holders of bonds in New Zealand. The House divided on Mr M'Callum's amendment, wliich was rejected by 10 votes to 21, and the original committee was set up. DAYLIGHT SAYING. Mr SIDEY moved the second reading of tile Definition of Time Bill (Daylight Saving). He explained that as the House had heard his explanation of the measure last year, he would not waste time by a recapitulation. He had made a slight alteration in this year's Bill. It was that the alteration of time should apply only to three months of the year—November, December, and January, the three longest. months in th'e year. Mr HANAN supported the Bill as being a great advantage to those desiring outdoor recreation. Mr E. NEWMAN opposed the Bill, because it was detrimental to country interests. The farmera were against the prorosa.l. Mr RUSSELL said the Bill was only meant a change of the clocks once, and then everything went on as usual. From the point of view of the health of the neople, the Bill was a great blessing. As one interested in healthy outdoor recreation, Mr WILFORD supported the measure.

Mr ISITT upbraided the farmers with selfishness in oV A cting to the Bill, and asked tbem to look at it in a liberal way for once.

Mr F, H. SMITH, as a country man, objected to having to get up an hour earlier, and said he would vote against the Bill.

The debate was carried oil by Messrs Statham, Payne, Bradney, and Dr Newman, who supported the Bill, and by Mr Pearce, Sir W. Buchanan, Mt Nosworthy, and Mr Forbes, who opposed it. Mr SIDEY replied, and the House divided on the second reading, the voting being: For, 36; against, 23, The Bill was read a second time amidst applause, . GAMING BILL. Mr WILFOIID moved the seoond reading of the Gaming Act Amendment Bill (No. 2), which repeals sub-section 2 of section 5 of " The Gaming Amendment Act, 1910," substituting a clause authorising the issue of licenses in any one year on not more than 250 specific days, preference to be given to country clubs whose licenses were not renewed, and then consideration to be given to hunt clubs up to 10 permits to use the totalisator in any one year. The mover made no explanation of the Bill when moving the second reading. Mr HANAN said the House could not pass tuch a radical amendment of the gaming law without some explanation from the mover. They also had a right to get a lead from the Government. Mr - WILKINSON said they did not want an increase in the number of. racing' days, but a better distribution of them. The bookmaker should be legislated out of existence. Mr G. M. THOMSON said the House had expressed its views on the extension iof racing in 1911. He could not speak with authority, but he calculated that between £3,000,000 and £4,000,000 would pass through the machine this year. He strongly opposed gambling in any form. He would exterminate any person who lived on his fellow men through gambling, He would support a redistribution of the racing permits. Mt RUSSELL protested against debating such a measure at such a late hour. He objected to any increase in the number o! days of racing in New Zealand, and said the way; to get over the diffi-

culty which existed was a redistribution of permits. He criticised the Government's action in handing over to the Racing Conference the distribution of permits.

The Hon. Mr MASSEY said the system which was now in vogue had been the custom for 10 or 12 years. What had been done was that one day had been taken from Christchurch and one from Marton and two given to Rangitikei. He knew an injustice had been done, and he ivas going to see it righted. At 11.30 p.m. Mr YOUNG moved the adjournment of the debate. Mr WILFORD said he recognised that the Bill was dead before he moved the second reading of it. It wag a move on the part of tho Government to kill his Bill in favour of a Bill by Mr Hunter dealing with the same matter. The debate-was adjourned at 11.40 p.m. and the House rose.