LICENSING BILL.

Press, Volume LXIII, Issue 19160, 17 November 1927, Page 9

LICENSING BILL.

THREE ISSUES OR TWO?

THE MAJORITY QUESTION. (PBJSS ASSOCUTTOY TSLSORAX.) WELLINGTON, November 16. Tho debate on the second reading of the Licensing Amendment Bill was resumed in the House of Eoprcsentatives this afternoon. Mr Bellringer (Taranaki) said he considered the extension of the period of licensing polls to six years would intensify political unrest, because at every election the reinstatement of the three-year period would bo made a burning question. So far .as accommodation was concerned he maintained all that was required would speedily be forthcoming so soon as there was sufficient demand for it, but it was not necessary to add an open bur to every such establishment- He stood for tho two issue ballot papor, and for the bare majority, which was the principle of true democracy. He believed that Prohibition could bo enforced, and he refused to surrender to the law breaker. Law-abiding citizens were always the best citizens. There were thousands of people who had never voted for Prohibition, who, if it were carried, would be prepared to give it a fair trial, bocause they had the law-abiding instincts of the British ratio. The Hon. Mr Buddo (Kaiapoi) said he thought the present law was working satisfactorily, and he regretted that the Prime Minister had brought in the Bill before the House, which showed a distinct tendency to balance things between the contending parties. He was against six year polls, and he favoured the two issue ballot'paper, with the bare majority. In Dry America. Mr Tapley (Dunedin North) said the majority of his constituents were Prohibitionists, but he was not, because he believed it could not be enforced. He believed it would make for a raco of law breakers. It had done no good for America, and it would do no good for New Zealand. He was in favour of control of the liquor trade, but was of opinion that before an alteration was made in the ballot paper, it should be referred to the people. He was pledged to three-year polls. Mr Wilford (Hutt) saifl he was satisfied that as the result of Prohibition in America, the saloon had gone for ever. He did not believe the sale of spirits would ever again be permitted, but he did believe the people of the United States would revert to the ueo of light wines and light beer. He had never voted for Prohibition, and never would. He was a State Controller, and he protested against the Bill which deprived him of the right to vote for that issue.

Mr Horn (Wakatipu) said that if he had been asked to draft a Licensing Bill, he could not have made a much better job of it than the Prime Minister ' had done. He, however, disagreed with .him in cutting out the ''State Control" 'issue. That was tho most important issue on tho ballot paper. Parliament should be elected for five years, and licensing polls should not be held more frequently, to give. security of tenure, without which there could never be good service to the public. He favoured the 5545 majority, and would support the Bill", except as regards tho "State. Control" issue.

Mr Macmillan (Tauranga) said he considered that there should be greater freedom for the transfer of licenses, a 5 7 he indicated that he intended, when in Committee, to move an amendment in that direction. Greater Control Needed. Mr J. A. Lee (Auckland East) said he vas convinced that the people of New Zealand were tired of the Prohibition issne, and that it would not be carried in New Zealand for many yearß. In the meantime greater control of the liquor traffic was necessary, and this, he thought, would be found in State Control. He therefore favoured the three-issue ballot-paper. He would vote for the middle issue; he would fight for that issue; and, if defeated, he would vote against the Bill at every stage until it was either carried or defeated, i ' Mr Sidey (Dunedin South) said he had favoured the three*flfths majority up to the time when the three-issue ballot-paper was introduced. Then it was understood that whatever issue was carried, it would be by a bare majority, and no question of changing that majority had been before the country at the last election. He regarded the vote for State Control as insignificant, and therefore he favoured the two-issue ballot-paper on the' bare majority. Mr Forbes (Hurunui) said he would not apree to the extension of the period between polls unless sufficient guarantees were forthcoming that some improvement in the Trade would take place. He favoured the 65-45 majority. $ was not undemocratic, because under the "country quota" members of Parliament were elected on much the same principle. He advised the advocates of Corporate Contro' to buy an hotel, and run it on the lines they advocated, ana demonstrate to the people what they could do in the way of reform. He was not satisfied with the position of the licensed Trade in New Zealand at the present time, but he did not think Prohibition was a solution of our problems. Mr Savage (Auckland West) said he had been a member of Licensing Commutes several times since he had been a member of the House, but he did not see much that he had learned at those Committees. One thing he had learned there was the complex character of the problem; and he congratulated the Prime Minister upon the definite stand h- had taken up. There were none of the definite principles of the Bill with which he agreed. He wanted three issues, with preferential voting. That was not in the Bill, and if it could not be put in the Bill, he would have to vote for something he did not want. He stood for triennial polls, and for the bare majority, no matter how many issues there were. That was not in t" Bill, and if the Bill ever reached the third reading stage, which he very much doubted, he would probably be found voting against it. Local Option Again? Mr Harris (Waitemata) Baid the change from the bare majority to 55-45 wai a gain of 22 per cent, to the Trade. It was moßt unfair that 45 voters of any section of the community should out-vote 55 voters of any other section. If the bare majority were departed from, the New Zealand Alliance had ft right to ask for the restoration of local option, which they gave up when the bare majority was adopted. To extend the period between polls would not give security of tenure, because there could be no security in an insecure business. T,o do as suggested meant a gift of hundreds of thousands of pounds to the Trade. The House was not justified in doing that without some quid pro quo, and so far as he knew there was no proposal in that direction. He favoured the two-issue ballot-paper,

but was not in favour of any system of preferential voting. He would vote for th- second reading of the Bill in the hope that the Bill would bo amended in Comnittee in the directions he desired.

Mr Atmore (Nelson) protosted against the State Control issue being eliminated from the ballot-paper. To disfranchise 56,000 people could not under any circumstances bo justified. Mr Sullivan (Avon) argued that tho Bill did not comply with tho first principle of democracy, inasmuch as it doparted from the bare majority. The extension of tenure was a gift of a privilege to tho Trade, to which it was not entitled. So long as there was a threeissue ballot paper, those issues should be settled on a basis of preferential voting. Mr Ooates Replies. Tho Prime Minister, in reply, said he had never been able to discover any documentary evidence establishing a pact between the Government and the Maoris of tho King Country, but if n pact was made, ho would not depart from it. The House would bo ablo to deal with the amendment, of which notice had been given by tho member for Waitomo, but if ho could be satisfied that a pact was made, he would not accept that amendment. With regard to the extension of tho term of liconse, he said ho knew that people in Great Britain wore prepared to invest £IOO,OOO in tho hotel business in this country if a better tenure wero granted, but at present they would not do so because they did not feel that they had security. Further, the Bill specially imposod on a Licensing Committee tho duty of seeing that if this concession was granted to tho Trade, they must provido accommodation up to tho required standard. He felt justified in weighting tho voting by the 5545 majority by tho vote of tho pooplo at last election, when they did not say that Prohibition should be carried. To make a great chango such as Prohibition without a big public backing behind it would bo a serious mistake, and ho was afraid many people did not rcaliso how great the responsibility was. If the law was passed it must bo carried out, and it would be difficult to do so if there was no forco of publio opinion behind it. He referred to difficulty which must be faced by the Minister for .Finance if Prohibition were carried, and although it might bo argued that America was not troubling about finance, he desired to point out that the position of America in that respect was far different from that of most other countries. It was not a fair statement of the ease to say that the whole of America's present prosperity was duo to Prohibition*.

Members might find themselves in a difficulty as the Bill progressed bocause of their pledges. In that case he advised thorn to stick to their pledges as far as possible, not forgetting that they had a broad national duly to perform. If they took the broadest view possible, ho did not think much fault could bo found with them. He had taken the responsibility of eliminating the third issue because ho did not feel that it had justified itself. Ho thanked members for their kindly reference* to himself. He asked them to get down to business, and deal with the clauses of the Bill as rapidly as possible. Ho would deal with each amendment on its merits, but he could not bo responsible for everything the House might do. Mr McCombs: The House will take that responsibility itßelf. On the question that the Bill bo read a second time, a division was called for, the motion being carried by 68 votes to 7.

The seven members who voted against the second reading were Messrs Armstrong, Atmore, Bartram, H. E. Holland (Buller), J. A. Lee (Auckland East), Parry, and Savage. Mr Nash Was paired against the second reading, and Mr Jordan for it. In Committee. The. House then went into Committee on the Bill. On the short title Mr Atmore argued that tho life of Parliament should be extended- to five years, and then it would be reasonable to hold licensing polls at the same periods. The six-year proposal* was one reason why he was opposed to the Bill. At 1 o'clock discussion on the short title was still proceeding, being carried on mainly by the advocates Of State Control, who argued in favour of their theory as a solution of all licensing problems. The House was still sitting when thi* edition went to press.

DECISION OF METHODIST SYNOD (PMSS ASSOCUtIO* WtMBAK.) DtJNEMN, November 16. When the Temperance and Morals Committee's report was before the Methodist Synod, a short discussion on the Licensing Bill before the House tiok place, and the following resolutions were unanimously carried:— "The Synod, expresses gratification at the failure of the recent attempt to legislate for increased betting facilities, and trusts that Parliament will make no attempt to resuscitate the Bill." "This Synod welcomes the introduction of the Prime Minister's Licensing Bill. It commends the proposed elimination of the State Control issue and other clauses calculated to control abuses of the liquor laws, but is utterly opposed to the 55-45 handicap and to the extension of the poll from three to six yearß, and urges members of Parliament to vote on this measure in the interests of national well-being and righteousness."

LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL. (MSBS ASSOCIATE* tSHOftAIf.) WELLINGTON, November 16. In the Legislative Council to-day the Seeds Importation Bill was received from the House, read a first time and referred to the Stock Committee. The Hon- Mr McGregor gave notice to introduce the Contributory Negligence Bill. The Council approved of the amendments proposed by the Governor-General in the Bural Intermediate Credit Bill. The Main Highways Amendment Bill was put through its final stages and passed. The Motor Vehicles Amendment Bill was read a second time. The Howard Estate Amendment Bill was passed with amendments. The Council adjourned at 127 p.m.