LICENSING QUESTIONS.

Poverty Bay Herald, Volume XLVII, Issue 15315, 10 September 1920, Page 9

LICENSING QUESTIONS.

DISCUSSION IN THE HOUSE. I

WELLINGTON, thia day. j j Licensing questions /were discussed m. a general way by the House last night, i when the Hon. E. P. Lee moved the 1 second reading of tho ■ Licensing Amendment. Bill to limit the practice, of hips- - ing Hocuses so as to transfer them to ' some distance m the same licensing area. The discussion was mostly irrelevant "to the Bill itself, exponents of opposite views on the licensing question having ' a full opportunity for their expositions. Mr. Lee said it wsis not intended that the Bill should be the basis of a gyn!eial amendment of • the licensing \ n \v ol • the Dominion., therefore the Government would not be able to accept a general amendment, but would confine the .measure to the. two points with which it dealt. The first part of the Bill sought- to prevent lapsed licenses being transferred to a -greater distance than provided for m .clause 4 of the principal Act, one halfrmile, m the borough and one mile m tho country. He proposed to ask the House to disagree -with the repeal of section 144 of the principal Act, because that repeal was not necessary for the. purpose of tho Bill, Clause ,4 ' presented increases m licenses except iv cases where there was a necessary increase of population. Both amendments were m keeping with the spirit of .the licensing law, and as N he had already intimated he would not accejrit a general amendment to that. law. He invited the Honse to be moderate m the matter of amendments. Speaking to the . measure, Mr. W. D-. Lysnar expressed regret that the Government had limited the purpose of the Bill, which was really a concession to extremists, tho prohibitionists. There was a necessity for tlie Government to I do more than accede to the Wishes of I one section of the community. It had I been stated-' that the no-license people ■ did not want remedial measures, but he was prepared to move a number of amendments when ihe Bill .wns consid 1 erod m. committee. . They were as follows : 1. That all future 'licensing polls . shall be taken on a day separate from tho general election, such day to be de- f tormined by Order-in-Councif. 2. That m order to secure to the public pure liquors it shall he obligatory on licensing committees to secure , samples at least three t"-mes a year of different liquors t m hotelß under, their jurisdiction, and have such samples analysed and a report thereon made available for publication. 3. That the present licensing fees for licensed premises be abolished, and a charge of 2£ per cent, be made 'upon all purchases of liquor by licensees. Half of any moneys collected for such licenses shall be paid as at present' to local bodies and .half to the .consolidated revenue account. 4. That m order to secure increased accommodation at existing or .any new licensed premises, tho ,j number of rooms required for the travel- j ling public shall be., not; less than 12 m the. country, 20 m towns, and 30 m the cities, and that m order to encourage owners of licensed premises to provide such accommodation licensing polls shall be taken at six-year intervals. Replying to their request for an opportunity to deal with the whole licensing reform, the Prime Minister said it would be quite impossible this, session ; m fact it would have , to stand' over until after the next general election,\yben the community would decide if | licenses were to be" continued. If the result favored continuation the liquor question would be dealt with m the interests of .the community ii_ a manner different from what it "had- ever been treated previously^ said the Premier. In the meantime the present. Bill was necessary to correct errors 'which crept into the present law, and beyond that the Government did not intend to go. Mr. Lee had previously explained that- the measure -was of' very limited sphere. Mr. McCombs spent, his half -hour m quoting statistics to prove that no-license did not increase the .sale of liquor or drunkenness.

Mr. McCallum declared that the P.ill was a 'Waste ofHime. It was trifling with a great social question. Mr. Isjtt said the whole, and the only purpose of the ,Bill -was to prevent increases of licenses, which mighf be made r.wins to an accidental flaw iii tbe ox-

bting law. Mr. Jonn.'ilgs pomp/ained that the. figures quoted .by^ Mr. McCombs did not J fairly represent the position, because they took., no note of the liquor consnm- i ed m .the King. Country whifch was dry by procFamation, andnptby vote of tlio people, .and where more liquor was drunk than m anjj throe , no-liconse districts. Mr. Svkes declared that, under nolitense, Masterton, was one Of •> ihe .most j moral aud prosperous 'towns m the Do- ! minion. \ ' ; -, , ; - „ .'.■,-•..; .j

Mr. Glenn thought it better to spreacf licenses about the <?6untarsr.. Mr. Sullivan quoted tf letter to the Premier from the Moderate League, m which they statfd that with the exception, of clause 3 they favored the Bill. This showed that some of the critics of the Bill did'- not represent ihe "Moder ?£i e " s<? . ct 'on of the community. Tlie Bill -was then read a second time on. the, voices.— Parltamentavy Reporter.