RACING COMMISSION.

Thames Star, Volume LVII, Issue 14728, 5 August 1921, Page 2

RACING COMMISSION.

THE RECOMMENDATIONS.

FERVID PROTESTS. (Special Correspondent.) WELLINGTON, August 3

If the Government by appointing the Racing Commission hoped to shift on to other shoulders than its own 1 the responsibility of determining the number of totalisator licenses and the manner of their distribution, it is doomed to sad disappointment. It has obtained from the Commission a very admirable report and a series of recommendations which a majority of the people knowing most about the various problems involved approve. But the proposal to withhold licenses from several long-estab-lished racing clubs, for reasons which seem to the commissioners good and sufficient, has raised a storm of protest which forebodes badly for the report when it is submitted to Parliament. The loudest cry comes from interested people who are anxious to save this or that club from extinction, but behind these noisy dissentients are those who object to any increase in the number of licenses, those who disapprove of the concession to trotting clubs and those who are anxious to embarrass the Government and the racing authorities at any price. Between them they constitute a very’formidable army and one likely to exercise considerable influence upon the elected branch of the Legislature. CASE FOR THE OPPOSITION. With almost hysterical fervour the “New Zealand Times” has taken up the cudgels on behalf of the opposition to the Commission’s findings. “There is so jnuch that is objectionable in the findings of the Commission and so little that is calculated to command public approval,” it says, “that it is amazing to find that the Government is prepared to give even temporary effect to the recommendations without condescending to wit for the opinion and voice of Parliament.” The protesting journal is particularly concerned for the “admirably managed” Napier Park Club and the “popular” Avondale Club, which are .threatened with “suppression,” but between its spasms of indignation it reiterates in varyin--form its assertion that the Government is flouting Parliament -and vio - lating the fundamental principles of representative Government. Its opinion of the members of the Commission is that they are “a coterie of obscure individuals of whom probably not one would be able to secure election to Parliament on the popular vote.” Finally this critic warns the Minister of Internal Affairs that if he attempts to carry out the recommendations of the Commission he will find, himself in serious conflict with public opinion. A PHILOSOPHIC MINISTER.

Mr. Downie Stewart refuses to be perturbed by the evil things that are predicted for him. He is not conscious of having flouted Parliament or having violated the fundamental principles of representative government. He had been flattering himself, indeed, that his offence lay in upholding the right of Parliament to pronounce judgment upon the. recommendations of the Commission before they are put into operation. He has jealously preserved for the representatives of the people the prerogative of saying whether there shall be more totalisator licenses or not. The worst that should be said of him, he thinks, is that he has withheld the licenses of the Napier Park Club, the Avondale Club, and of several other clubs pending the decision of the House and the Council in regard to the Commission’s report. This he has done in deference to a promise made when the Gaming Amendment Act was passed and when a later meeting of Parliament this year was unforeseen. The Minister feels that he is discharging his duty to the country and that nothing else matters greatly., THE POSITION. As a matter of fact the Minister’s attitude in this respect is entirely in keeping with the spirit of the law and with his own promise. The law provides for the appointment of the Commission, the scope of its inquiry and the presentation of its report. The Minister’s promise, following up - on Mr. Massey’s declaration to the same effect, commits the Government to submitting the Commission’s report to both Houses of Parliament. If either House rejects the recommendations of the Commission, or the Order-in-Council in which they are embodied, the Government will have either to abandon all idea of reform for the present or, proceed .by way of legislation. Meanwhile the Minister will issue licenses neither to the clubs that have been named by the Commission for extinction nor to the clubs that have been recommended for new or additional licenses. This, of course, is necessary, first of all in discharge of the Minister’s promise and then in order that Parliament may be free to give immediate effect to its flecisiori. The Government never has displayed a great deal of back-bone over this totalisator business, but its fault has lain rather in evading responsibility than in arrogating to itself the functions of the people’s representatives.