GAMING BILL.

Press, Volume LX, Issue 18216, 29 October 1924, Page 9

GAMING BILL.

THIRD READING DEBATE. LABOUR AMENDMENT NEGATIVED. (AtIWDV.'D rBESS ASSOCIATION XEPOUT.) WELLINGTON, October 28. In the House of Representatives this afternoon, the Hon. K. F. Bollard moved, without any comment, the third reading 0 f the Gaming Bill. Mr W. E. Parry at once moved as :-r, amendment that the Bill be referred back to the Committee with a view I<> inserting provisions for safeguarding thfl lives and limbs of .jockeys by means of improvements on the courses and restriding the size of the fields; also tn prevent jockeys, trainers, and stable employees from contracting themselves out of the Workers' Compensation Act. e.r jockeys from contracting themselves out of the Master and Apprentices Act; giving racing employees the right of appeal to a stipendiary magistrate end a representative of their Union and the Bacing Club, and guaranteeing to them the right of orgariisalion; and also providing that the Rules of Racing affecting conditions of employment and wages should be subject to the approval of the Labour Department.

J£r Parry said evcrvoiif desired to promote legitimate recreation amongst tIW people, but by virtue of the oppor'tnjjities which racing gave for gambling it was resolving itself into something lil ce a business out nf which c.erttin people made considerable sums of money. It was only right that some measure of protection should be given t« thoiie employed in the industry. His jgendment was designed to have that eject. He also thought that there Should be some provision in the law to prevent more being taken out of a horse th«n could be got out of it by the application of the whip and the spur. Reeently he had seen it reported in a southern paper that an electric battery hid been used 011 a horse. He did not know whether this was true, but if it was, then it showed where horseracing was drifting, and some check should be put upon it. He then traversed each of the proposals, urging 1 hat they were reasonable reforms, many of which were enjoyed by those engaged in other industries. He said all he wanted was to sec raeing carried 011 constitutionally and in accordance with the law of the land. He denied that there were any sinister motives behind the attitude of the Labour Party, and he asked the House to eoniider his amendment on its merits. Mr Holland seconded the amendment. On these points, he said, the Labour Party was undivided. There were ngtprplly differences on many points, but on these they were unanimous. First, and before all other considerations, they put the preservation of life and the safety of limb. For that reason they wished to fix the minimum circum- ■ ferencc and width of racecourses, and to make other provisions which would tend to reduce the chance of accident. He contended that the refusal to permit jockeys to form a u» ion was going back to the toys when men were transported to Australia for advocating the formation of ai agricultural union for the purpoie of raising the wages of agricub tnral labourers in England to 10s per week. Tie Bacing Conference was composeg pf men no doubt admirable, but son® of them were the greatest gamblers ; in New Zoaland. And. these men liad tlto right to sit in judgment on others and to punish them for alleged offences. }J«n who were so punished should have tie right of appeal against tbia lawlessness to stipendiary magistrates. There was worse gambling in business than there was on racecourses, but whenj Labour members honestly stated their I objections to racing gambling they were wist not with direct charges, but with iniinuatiops that there were sinister influences behind them. Labour '3 challenge to those who laid these charges vu to make them in the open, when they would be met with an answer sharp aad swift, The proposal? were reasonable, and he appealed to the Govern-,, ment to accept them and embody them in the Bill when it went before the Legislative Council. Oh a division, the amendment was lost by 24 votes to 40. j Division List. The division list was as follows: Against Amendment 40. Anderson McLeod Atmore MacMillan , Bell Massey Bitchener Murdoch 1 Bollard Noswortliy Buddo Parr Coatea Poland tie la Perrelle Pomare , Dickson, J. S. Rhodes, T. W. ' Bald Rhodes, Sir R. H Glenn Bollcston, J. C. 1 Guthrie Smith Hnwkon Stewart Bflnare Sykes Hockly Thomson Hudson Uru Linklater eitch Lye Wilford Lyanat Witty McKay Young For Amendment 24. Armstrong McKcen • Bartram Macpherson Dickson, J. M. Masters Ijldie Montcith .Eraser Munro Harris Parry Holland O'Brien Isitt Holies ton, F.J. - Jordan Savago Langstone Sidev ftullivan McCombs Wright Evening Sitting. Besuming the debate in the evening, Hll Armstrong said he hoped the Miniate* of Customs would speak in the debate and say exactly what he meant w&en lie imputed sinister motives to tfcoee opposed, to the Bill. He challenged Mr Stewart to put all his cards «a the table. Labour had all their «teds on the table, and they wanted to «v k&Ow what accusations were being held £ «S*inst them. He would also like Mr /J Stewart to make clear what he meant ' *len he told his Methodist friends that •P>rt from Clause 2 the other clauses I#te necessary to the reform of racing. fift (Mr Armstrong) contended that not of the additional clauses "was wantby the Racing Conference, and not ti&of them conferred any benefit on the Wblic. So there was only one clause the BUI that meant anything at aU, QMwise 2, which granted additional per"ttts. He was going to oppose the Bill wwise it did nothing to curb the PPfer of the Racing Conference. It 414 nothing to help jockeys, or to reracing; it did nothing but increase - for gambling- _ x . -imt B. A. Wright said bis opposition to the Bill was based solely on his opinion that there were already sufficiracing days in New There Store no sinister influences behind it.

What ho wanted to see was a redistribution of the existing permits; rot the granting of additional permits. Mr Isitt defended the tactics of those associated with him in resisting: the Bill. Unfortunately they had l>een defeated. and they could only make the best of the position. They were animated by higher motives than pleasure. They were striving for tho good' of the country and for the development of the, people along right lines, and while they hail suffered defeat they » ere encouraged by the knowledge that they had gone down in a good cause. Mr V. H. Potter said it was well known that bookmakers were hero, there, and everywhere. It wns im]>osxible to pass legislation which would effectually prohibit 'them. Therefore the proper thine to dr> was to leirnli- ■ and license thorn so that the police could control them.

Mr F. Lanpstone claimed that the opp neuts of the Bill du' inp: the discussion had pointed out many glaring evdconnectod with racing. such a" credit i>etting and ai'.twr-.i!!" conduct en tin* part of the ( »n!er-ik-c. Not one wrd had come from the supporter, of the Hill in repiy to the ease v iiic.'. had been nude out against rat-iru'-Their only roplv wh* tr. for«t» thr ur.h the. Hi>u-e a I'i'l v. hi'!; could h;t\ n<< effect h'.'.t in increase gaml-lirg and iricr>-nse the winnings o! >n:c c.t the rich liors* -o« ners.

Mr A. Hani': condemned tho grossly utieonst;! uur.-nal px i>cecdin<£s <<n the '•art iif the Government- by which forced the i!d! tlnougli the House. It had been claimed that it was net a party Ft ill, but the whole responsibility ii r its passage rested u[cn the Government and they mii~t accept that responsibility. The Government, had promised to set up a Commission oi !"jiquiry into racing methods during the recess. Where, then, was '.he need t" force this Bill through before thai Cr«M-mis.-don lmd provided me ml" r- i'.e.necessary inlnrmsith n'? War. there nnj justification for it!- es. t):e yll-potu'r-fti! Racing Conference had told the Government that H must have additional pennits, and the Govornment Iwl iv;i been strong enough to say "No.' Mr J. Edie repudiated the imnotation that there were any sinister influences behind his opposition to the Bill.

The Hon. A. D. McLeod said that, earlier in the debate he had said the bookmakers were behind the agitation against the Bill. When lie made thi>t statement lie honestly believed it was true, but if the members of the La'tour Party g;n-£> him their assurance that they wero not- acting in the interests of the bookmakers ho would accept that assurance.

Mr Jordan: We give you that assurance.

Continuing, the Minister attacked Mr Harris, who, he said, whilfc declaring that lie would die in the lust ditch bo lore another permit was granted, was all the time an offioer of t'no Tak&puua .Tockev Club, which seemed to show a lack of consistency. He would not inHmie Mr Harris in his absolution from sinister motives.

Mr Harris, in a personal explanation, said he was merely a courtesy vicepresident of the Takapuna. Jockey Club and took no part in the administration of the club. H© maintained that the Tak-apuna Club was not a proprietary club. Mr Sullivan thanked the Minister of Lands for the downright Scottish way in which he had withdrawn his previous allegation against the opponents of the Biff, and asked the Minister of Customs to get up and follow the same course. If he was not prepared to do that then he should leave bis generalities and come out into the open and specify the members of the House who were affected by sinister influences. Failing this withdrawal or affirmation, the Minister was guilty of conduct which was almost dishonourable so far as the standards of the House were concerned.

The Hon. W. Xosworthv said the Bill was not a party measure ; # it was H-sked for by country districts from one c.id of the Dominion to the other, and ft was his duty "to keen her bead to tlie wind" and see that tJie Bill passed.

Mr J. A. Lee said it was an extraordinary. thing that at a time like thi6, ail important business must be put aside and the Government could think of nothing else but granting thirty-one totalisator permits. This was surely testimony to the power of the New Zealand Racing Conference, which was not interested in sport at all, but only in raking in more money with which stakes fcould be increased. Mr J. M. Dickson said he believed it was economically unsound to increase facilities for gambling. He therefore opposed the Bill, and would have done so had there been no other member aeainst- it. No influence, sinister or otherwise, had actuated his action, and ho protested against these innuendoes. The Hon. J. G. Coates said he made no apology for being a member of the Now Zealand Bacing Conference. lie was very proud of the constituency that scut him there. All lie could say was: ''God help the sport if Parliament was going to control and draft regulations for racing." The charges against the Racing Conference amounted to nothing so far as he could see. Tho debato was still proceeding when the Telegraph Office closed at 2 a.m. ATTACK ON "THE PRESS." MR HOLLAND LETS HIMSELF GO. (aracuL TO ''TUB ?XUS.") WELLINGTON> October 28. In the House of Representatives this afternoon Mr H. Holland, Leader or'the Labour Party, referring to a recent- article in ' ''lbe Press" on the Gaming Bill stonewall, said it was one of the most poisonous and dastardly instances of low-down journalism that it was possible to find in New Zealand. Ho added that he was referring to the cowardly insinuation that some members of that House wore bought over by the bookmakers. He did not know any lower type of journalism than that which descended to that sort of thing. The Christchurch "Press" was the paper he was referring to. Nobody, he said, took the Christchurch "Press" seriously, but his opinion of the man, or the director, who would deliberately do that kind of thing was that tboy would not hesitate to do much worse things if there were not some restraint in law to prevent them. Let them make their charges in the open and not crawl through a gutter of filth, and mud, and innuendo, for the purpose of blackening the character of members. If they made their charges in the open, then they would get an answer that would be swift, and one that they would not like.