GAMING BILL STONEWALL

Otago Daily Times, Issue 19311, 24 October 1924, Page 8

GAMING BILL STONEWALL

AN ALL-NIGHT SITTING. MR MASSEY’S ULTIMATUM. .“GO ON OR GET OUT.” : 'Wnoii Otjb Own Cohbespondent.) , - WELLINGTON. October 23. -The stonewall of the Gaming Bill was continued all through Wednesday night and Thursday morning. Dull for the most part, it livened for a while after the first of the morning relays entered the House. Most of the time the discussion had been on the short title of the tfill., but soon after daylight Mr MTlvride (tho Labour member for Napier) ■ moved io report progress, and this gave the op/onenta of the Bill a fresh lease of the right to talk. All of them could speak again for four turns of 10 minutes each. . One of the incidents of the early morning was provided by Mr M‘Combs (the Labour member for Lyttelton), an opponent of the Bill, who, noticing that there "was a bare quorum, called the attention of tho Chairman to what ho declared was the fact that there was not a quorum in the House, and then hurriedly slipped out of the Chamber so that when tho count was taken there would be one short of the quorum. The Chairman took the count, but stated that the rule was that the member drawing the attention of the Chairman to the state of the House must be included in the count. This inclusion of Mr M’Combe assured the presence of the quorum, and the strategy of the member for ' Lyttelton was overcome. Another sidelight was Mr Potter’s ati teirrpt to fill in his 10 minutes. Seeking for matter, Mr Potter proceeded to give reasons why progress should be reported, and urged that for one thing he felt after sitting there so long he needed to go away to get a shave. At about half-past 7 in the morning the Hon. J. G. Coates took a hand. Ho said .that what wag going on meant that some people intended that democracy was not to rule in this country. He realised that ,«om© of those who were opposing the Bill had fallen into a trap innocently. -••-Mr Potter was on his feet as soon as Mr Coates sat down. “I have been misrepresented,” he said. ■ Mr Atmore; What, did he say you are Innocent? The Hon. W. Noworthy, who had been in charge of the House overnight, rose from the seat on which ho had been curled up. for some hours. “I realise what is going on,” ho said. “I realise that the member for Christchurch North and a few members have been made use of. I realise what is going on. I have been here lor long enough, and I am not fool enough not to know what is doing. I am not going to give way. I am willing to sit her© for three days so long as the prime Minister is having a good rest. I am willing to stick to my post, and so are my colleagues. I suggest that at 8 o’clock we should have an hour and a-half’s adjournment for breakfast and then go straight on again.” Labour members applauded by handclapping, but the Chairman of Committees (Air J. A.. Young) damped their enthusiasm with the icy observation, “That rests with •the Chairman.” Mir J. O’Brien (the Labour members for Westland) took the floor to continue the debate, but had barely commenced when he*-wag interrupted by the Chairman, who announced that he would leave the Chair and resume at 9.30. The announcement •Irew renewed bursts of hand-clapping from (he Labour benches. AFTER BREAKFAST. ■- iAfbor the adjournment the party leaders, swho ;had been away for the night, appeared. Mr Massey and Mr Holland were in thoir places when the committee resumed, and Mr Wilford came in soon afterwards. , K . The Chairman attempted to slip the short title through, but Mr Parry (tho Labour member for Auckland Central) rose in the nick of time to continue the stonewall. Labour members sought to correct the Chairman by saying that it was not the short title that he should have attempted to put to the House, but the motion to report progress. The Chairman: No, that has lapsed, and tfie short title is the question. Mr Parry: The Prime Minister might be more reasonable this morning after having had a good night’s sleep. MJr Massey: Hear, hear. .Mr Parry; We are receiving wires from ell over the country. A voice from the Ministerial benches; I believe you. Mr Parry: Not from the quarter you have in. mind. Mr Parry proceeded to refer to what he considered was likely to be the fat© of members who took up a certain altitude on the Bill. ’The Chairman interrupted and pointed out that at 8.30 in the morning he had ruled that it would for the rest of the debate be tedious repetition to refer to .members having lost their seats at the last ©lection because of fheir attitude on the Gaming Bill, and as tedious repetition such arguments would be ruled out. Mr Holland: Point of order. Will the Prime Minister be allowed to answer those arguments or will he be ruled out? The Chairman: I will rule the Prime Minister out. PRIME MINISTER SPEAKS. ‘T think,” said the’ Prime Minister, “at this stage I am justified in saying a word on the position. I have been outside the House for some time, and Rave had a good sleep. I have com© back refreshed, and feeling better than I have done for the last fortnight.” Mr Parry: Where are your colours? Mr Massey: My colours are never wanting. Mr Holland; What part of the Bill is this? Mr Parry’s reference to colours was due to a red rose that Mr Massey had been wearing on the previous evening having disappeared, Mr Massey; It was not the red rose of Socialism, but the rose of England.—(Applause.) Anyhow, we did not come here to discuss Bowers. A Labour Member: Better if we had. Mr Massey: I thought that by this time better counsels would have prevailed. What has taken place shows the absolute necessity of the Standing Orders being revised. I have got to admit that I have been very backward in interfering with the opportunity for speech. Mr Sullivan: We are not preventing your people from speaking. They won’t speak. -,rMr Massey: No explanation is required. It has come to this—that something in tho nature of. a revision of the Standing Orders must be arranged so that the Speaker may be able to put an end to this kind of thing. Mr Sullivan: You are going to gag Parliament, are you? Mr Massey: No, but to ask Parliament to do what all the great Parliaments of the Empire have done —to prevent such a thing ns this taking place. Mr Holland: What a pity you did not .think of that when you were fighting the old-age pensions. Mr Massey : A very unworthy suggestion. I - made tho very suggestion then which is being carried into effect now. Mr Holland: I am talking of the holdup the 90-hours’ hold up. Mr Sullivan: The fact remains you stonewalled it. Mr Massey asked if “stonewall” were allowable language. The Chairman said that authorities had ruled against the use of the word. Air Massey: When this fight commenced jt was a question whether this House allowed to keep faith with those who for legislation that they considered. was mgently required in respect to gaming matters. That promise was made by me on behalf of my colleagues, and it ■was decided that when we got through * with the important legislation of the ses-Bion-we should go on with the Gaming Bill’ ' Mr Holland; We are not through with the’important business of the session. -' Mr Massey: I know; but we are through with certain taxation legislation, although there is other important legislation to come.- The position was, the Prime Minister said) whether Parliament was to keep itfr word. If it bad now gone beyond that, i*r- W«t» a question whether constitutional gddfemment was to rule in this country. ‘'Mr Parry: You said that_ on the Logisfettrre Amendment Bill, tod. -Mr Massey: It was in a different position,' and never reached tho stage that this haV reached. I have allowed it to remain on the Order Paper a« a monument to what occurred. The question now is whether constitutional government is going to rule •cwt whether w» are to be dictated to by a

Mr Sullivan: You have been the most effective dictator we have had.

Mr Massey : I take that as a compliment coming from the honourable gentleman. 1 have always endeavoured to be reasonable. I repeat that the question is whether wo are to be dictated to by a minority. Mr Sullivan; Or tho racing fraternity. Mr Massey; So far as this is concerned wo can’t stop. We have put our hands to tho plough, and we can’t turn back. It is “go on or get out.” Mr Parry : We accept your challenge. Mr Massey: The time has come for plain speaking. Labour; Go to the country. Mr Massey; I am quite willing to go to the country. Mr O’Brien: On 31 racing permits. That is what you would go to the country on. Mr Massey; On whether we shall submit to the tyranny of a minority. That is what we would go to the country on. A Labour Member: Cut that out. Mr Massey: I have found it necessary to speak plainly. I have been told about the obstruction I took part in. I never did it without a great deal of doubt, and I have stopped a great deal of it taking place. Members do not know that. Mr Holland: This repentance comes too late.

Mr Sullivan: Death-bed repentance. M r Massey: I have found it necessary to say this. We are going on. lam sure members on this side who have put up the fight will stand by what I have said. Labour: They have not put up any fight at all. MR HOLLAND INTERVENES.

As Mr Massey resumed his seat Mr Holland rose. “Like tho Prime ’ ho said, “I have been sleeping.” A Labour Member: Are you fresh too. Mr Holland: Fairly. The Prime Minister speaks of constitutional government. In what way have the Standing Orders been contravened ? How simple he must think the members are to swallow that, when we axe just taking advantage of parliar montaxy procedure to gain the legislation omr constituent:; want. I have never heard a more illogical pronouncement in my life. I one of those who agree that there is need for a revision of the Standing Orders. We want certain reforms concerning the powers of the conference —the safety of jockeys and the matter of weights. If we can get those I don’t caro very much about tho permits.-' Formerly the Bill was not made a Government measure, but apparently now it is. and the conclusion is that if the Bill is defeated the Government is defeated. If the Prime Minister will make that point clear there will bo a very swift alignment so far as tho forces opposed to the Government are concerned.

THE JOCKEYS’ INTERESTS.

Mr Massey: I agree the Bill is not an important measure and it is not a Government measure. lam sure that if there is anything wrong regarding tho health of the jockeys or -regarding the weights, a majority of the House is willing to put that right. There wa.s at one time provision in the Standing Orders for dealing with a situation of this kind, but unfortunately a ruling of the Speaker, I am not referring to the present Speaker, rendered that useless. There was a provision that it could be moved that the motion bo now put or not now put, but a ruling was driven by the Speaker that the debate on the main question might proceed afterwards and the Standing Order had never been of any use since. Some of my supporters have been misled by what is going on now. A Labour Member: Has Mr Isitt been misled?

CON STI TOT TONAL GOVERNMENT

Mr Massey: The Bill now ceases to be tho question. It is now a question of constitutional Government. Mr Sullivan: Gross misrepresentation. Mr Holland: While agreeing with the Standing Orders? Mr Masacy: Tho honourable gentleman again has tried to take advantage of the defects in tho Standing Orders. . . Mr Sullivan; I put it to you that it is a very dangerous thing to prevent the people’s powers of speech in Parliament. Mr Massey: I have no desire to do that, but when a debate of this kind goes on night and day it- is time something was done. This Bill can’t stop. The obstruction must stop. MR ISITT AND MR WILFORD. Mr Isitt: Point of order. I have been most grossly misrepresented. I wish to put mysell right, Mr Wilford: Point of order . Mr Isitt: I have the floor. I have raised a point of order before you. Mr Wilford (smiling): I have raised a point of order on your point of order.— (Laughter.) , . . Mr ‘lsitt (annoyedi): Bui I have not finished. . , Mr Wilford (his smile broadening) : ihat is why I raised it. Mr Isitt (more annoyed): But, Mr Young, I have not finished my point of order. Mr Young (coldly): I call on Mr Wilford. Mr Wiltord; My point of order is that the honourable member has not th© right to make this speech on a point of order. He can make, it when ho addresses the House unless his four turns have been exhausted. Mr Young: His four rights have been exhausted.

Mr Poland: I move to report progress and get .’t in on that. Mr Murdoch (Mr Poland’s bench mac©) thumped tho member for Ohinemuri vigorously, apparently fearful lest he should supply tho stonowallers with an idea for prolonging the debate. Mr fsiH was given leave to make his explanation. Mr Massey: I think it only right to say that I don’t think there is a member of this House who will say that Mr Isitt has been actuated by other than a pure and worthy motive. I will say Mr Sullivan; You will say he has been misled by us. ' Mr Massey: Th© member for Christchurch North has been misled by you or you by him. Which will you have? There is not a man in this House I would trust sooner than the member for Christchurch North. Mr Parry: You have to put a lot of trust in him just now. Mr Massey: But I think that my judgment is better than his at times, and I must follow my own judgment. Labour: Do you consider he is flouting the constitutional position? Mr Massey : Like others who are sincere, the honourable gentleman is sometimes mistaken. I tilinlc tho House should now agree to get on with the business of the country. The Chairman, at 20 minutes past 10, read a catalogue of forbidden subjects upon which ho proposed to close the mouths of hon. members. Mr Poland: Would it not be possible, Mr Young, to have a copy put in the lobby?— (General laughter.) Mr Sidey spoke of the Standing Orders, and was understood also to be talking about the constitution or the breaking of it, but his remarks could only be indistinctly heard in the press gallery. Mr Massey interjected: X cannot understand your breaking the constitution or anything else.—(Laughter.) Mr P. J. Rolleston objected to a statement made last night by the Minister of Lands, that those who were opposing the Bill were acting from selfish motives. He thought it was au unworthy remark to make. If the report of the Commission were carried out one permit would go to Timaru, one to Temuka, and one to Waitaki, yet he and his fellow-members, Messrs Burnett and Bitchener, were opposing the Bill. COMPROMISE SUGGESTED.

Mr MonteitU, in a loud voice, harangued the House about the necessity for curtailing the discussion. He gave an indication that an arrangement might he come to. Mr Savage (Labour member, Auckland West) said he was not against the permits, but he wanted conditions. It was not diplomatic to push the Bill through without conditions. He and others who were not opposed to permits hart been forced into the arms of opponents by people who called themselves sports. Mr Hockly had relieved Mr Young in the Chair.

Just after 11 a.m. Mr Monteith again held out the olive branch. He suggested that a committee be appointed of reasonable men from both sides and an adjournment made for an hour to come to an agreement. Mr Nosworthy said it was all very well to talk about sweet reasonableness, bnt there was only the one way out after what the Prime Minister had said—to get the Bill through, and as soon as the Bill had i>een passed tho way out -would be found. After all that thad taker, place the Government would now put its foot down, even if it had to go out. It it had to go, well let it go. At 11.20 a.m. the Labour Party moved that the Chairman leave the Chair, but Mr Parry (anotlur Labour memoer) was not in agreement with iiis fellow-members on vhe point. Mr Monteith made very heavy weather ■with a speech in support of the morion, and was repeatedly ruled out, and twice ordered to resume his feat. Mr K. S. Williams, relieved Mr Hockly in the Chair, rind the dreary discussion and waste of time continued till the luncheon adjournment, when the Cnairman of his own accord left the Chair.

The committee resumed at 2.30 p.m., and th© stonewall oontmueo on a fresn motion that the chairman leave the chair, moved

from the Labour benches. About halfpast 4 in the afternoon Mr Lee (Auckland East), who had come in apparently refreshed with sleep, made a strong appeal for a compromise committee. Members on his side of the House would agree to the appointment of one or two members from either side to effect a compromise. If such a conference wore arranged some portions of the Bill could bo out out and others remain in. They might agree to the Bill with some minor deletions. The conference might bo composed of average members of the groups that were fighting—not the extremists. He was willing to make a canvass on his side of the House with a vierv to suggesting a way out. Mr O’Brien (Labour) made a similar suggestion, and was proceeding to mention the" names of members who migm. act when he was pulled up by the chairman. Mr Young from time to time added to his list of prohibited subjects that could no longer be discussed on the motion to leave tho chair.

After dinner there were crowded galleries and a full attendance of members. Mr J. M. Dickson moved to report progress, but was very quickly pulled up by the chairman. Tho stonewallors proceeded once more to talk to tho motion, and when someone mentioned the word "wowsers” Mr Isitt rose to a point of order and complained of such an epithet being applied to members opposing the Bill, forgetting that he himself had used the term during the course of the debate. Mr Isitt seemed to get angry, but he was not allowed to proceed with his complaint, Mr Young not having hoard the interjection. Mr Langstone quoted from the Referee, the official organ of the racing clubs, reference to forfeiture and dishonoured cheques, and to tho. entrance and acceptance fees, but Mr Young ruled trie reference out of order.

Mr Atmore (Nelson) made a dignified and vigorous protest against the action of the stonowallers, and pointed out how ridiculous the suggestions were that tho Bill should lie postponed to give tho people a chance of representing an opinion on it. The Parliament, he said, must be very weak-kneed if it were afraid to settle questions that wore referred to it for settlement. Members who were taking up such a position were trifling with Parliament and wasting money that was very badly needed. He denounced the obstructive tactics that were being pushed tc extremes. If the Government gave way it would be offering a premium to a minority of 25 or 30 people to impose thoir will by a process of exhaustion on tile majority elected under democratic rule.

Mr W. J. Jordan (Manakau) referred to an anti-gambling meeting that was being held in Wellington that evening, and pictured an enraged and angry mob marching down Lambton quay upon members of Parliament who were too exhausted to defend themselves.—(Laughter.) Perhaps, he suggested, the matter would become so serious that the members of the Legislative Council would have to corn© to their assistance and defend them from that angry mob. — (Laughter.) “I shudder, Mr Young,” he added, “as to what mijjJjt happen. Only 36 hours ago they were saying good-bye to their Governor-General and were having their photographs taken, and then the awful scene of this angry mob coming down on members who were physically weak.”

The Chairman ruled that any reference to the physical or mental condition of hon. members was out of order.

Mr Jordan: Very well, Mr Chairman. I have sounded the warning note. The rest rests with you. —(Laughter.)

At midnight the House, in Committee, was still discussing the short title of the Gaming Bill. At 1.55 Mr Holland had asked the Minister in charge (then the Hon. C. J. Parr) how far 1 he proposed to go that night with the discussion. Mr Witty: Right away through. Mr Holland; I am not asking you, but tho Minister. Last night I put a similar question to the Minister, and I did not get the courtesy of an answer. If the Minister will state to what hour he intends going on, then I trill not speak any further, but if the idea, is to go clean through then I will speak to the motion. Mr Prrr intimated that ho was going right through with it. Mr Holland stressed the utter absurdity of what was going on. No one was fit to go on, he urged, and it was clear that no finality on the matter could be reached before midnight on Saturday. What, he asked, was the Government’s reason for this idiotic idea of going right on with this debate to the detriment of tho health of hon members and of the h?st interests of the country? The forces of the opposition tq-night seem very 'veil organised. Ono section, at present sleeping, will take up the midnight watch presently, and those who have been exhausting the patience of the; House will retire to rest. Mr Rhodes, the member for Thames, has relieved Mr Young in the Chair, and is keeping the obstructionists strictly within the tules of debate and warning them against tedious repetition.

There are indications that the stonewall will last until midnight on Saturday, and that the House will again be considering the Bill on Monday. So far members have been allowed a great deal of latitude. Shortly after midnight, however, Mr Hockley, who was in the Chair, made a more strenuous endeavour to keep members within the strict lines of debate Under his regime Mr Sullivan made heavy weather in endeavouring to give new reasons for reporting progress, and was down. Mr Jordan also was frequently pulled up by the Chairman, and eventually subsided.

(Ps* United Peess Amociattow )

WELLINGTON, October 23. At 0.55 a~m. Mr Nosworthy rose to a point of order and took opportunity to again state the attitude of the Government. They were, he said, going right on, Saturday night or no Saturday night, and tho respnsibility for the expense to the country of those proceedings must rest upon those who were opposing the Bill. At 1.5 a.m. tho resources of tho opponents of the Bill had run out, and a division was taken on the question to report progress. This was lost by 53 votes to 11, and the discussion then revolved round the amendment moved by Mi: ShUivan to strike out the words “Gaming Amendment” in the short title of the Bill, and substitute “Gambling Encouragement” as the title of the Bill.

M r Young ruled the amendment out of order as being irrelevant, and the same fate befel two other similar suggestions to amend the title of the Bill. After some further brief remarks by Mr Sullivan a division on the short title was taken at 1.15 a.m., when the clause was added to the Bill by 29 votes to 11. , The committee then proceeded to discuss clause 2, which authorises the addition of 51 additional permits. The discussion was proceeding when the telegraph office closed at 2 a.m. “A DISGRACEFUL EXHIBITION.” SCATHING PRESS COMMENT. (From Own Own Correspondent.) ( WELLINGTON, October 23. “Nothing,” says the New Zealand Times, “can excuse the character of the resistance to the Gaming Bill. It was a disgraceful exhibition from every decent point of view. It was a gross misuse of Ihe freedom of Parliament guaranteed for the protection of justice and righteousness, not to enable members to block measures which they do not like. It was a proclamation that parliamentary rule had passed from the hands of the representatives of the majority into those of members of a discontented Adutlarn. It was a practical assertion of the right of individuals to impose their will on the nation simply because it was their will. Throughout the hours so wantonly wasted, at enormous public expense, not a single word was said that can bo regarded as even a remote justification of the stonewall tactics on an unprincipled and intolerant minority. In this respect the House of Representatives was lowered to the despicable level of a bear garden, a thing which is o disgrace not to the rlouse only, but to human nature. The hideous exhibition was not a sudden outburst of thoughtless rage, though even as such it cannot be excused. On the contrary, it was a thing carefully prepared. Of that the solid irrefragable proof is in the number of amendments carefully prepared for prolonged obstruction of the measure before the House, not for its amendment ia any reasonable way. That the motives of these disturbers were good wo are, perfectly willing to admit, but when discussion is reduced to the absurd, and the business of the country is obstructed by chaos, no honest man can recognise good motive as sufficient justification. Some of the disturbers seemed to expect a howl all over the country. They ought not to be disappointed. There ought to be a howl from the North Cape to the Bluff for the drastic reform of a parliamentary procedure which makes such disgraceful tactics possible.” DUNEDIN METHODISTS. AN EMPHATIC PROTEST. At a largely-attended luncheon yesterday, given by the Methodist ministry and laymen to the Rev. A. A. Bensley. a Solomon Island missionary, and Mr Frank Thompson, the vice-president of the Now