Off-course Betting On Tote Urged

Chronicle (Levin), 7 January 1948, Page 6

Off-course Betting On Tote Urged

"Bookies" Out: Merger of Some Racing Clubs Proposed

Legalisation of off-course betting fhrougli the totalisator, of the installation of a doubles totalisator at race meetings, and of newspaper tipping and the publication of dividends are.among the radical .and farreaching refonps to the gaming laws of the countrj recommended by the Royal Commission on Graming "in its report released last night. ; Important changes in certain aspects of horseracing and trotting control recommended by the Commission hicluded the setting up of a Racing Advisory Board whose functions would be those of an adviser to the Minister of Internal Affairs with power to withhold or cancel totalisator licenses. The Commission recommended the amalgamation of the following racing (galloping) clubs: Woodville and Pahiatua to race at Woodville (alteruatively, the Pahiatua Club to retaiu its iclentity but to contiiiue its wartime practice of- racing at Woodville) ; Levin and Foxton to race at Levin; Masterton and Carterton to race at Masterton; and Marton and Rangitikei to race at Marton. The amalgamated club would enjoy the full liumbei of totalisator days previously allotted to botli clubs, with the exception of Foxton-Levin, oue of the Foxton days being "ear-marked" for a pool of floating days. ' No recommendations were made in regard't© the gi aiitmg of totalisator permits toi* dog* racing, or for the adoption of any premimn bond sclieme or establishment of a State lottery.

If bookmakers have been iooking to the report oi' the Commission to g'ive their "prot'ession" legal status in Kew Zealand, they are doomecl to disappointment. The report stated: "We are emphatically opposed to the licensing in any iorm of bookmakers." The provision oi' as good a system of off-course totalisator betting as vras possible, reinforced by a resolute siippression of illegal bookmaking, should, it was eontended, be produetive of some good results and, as experience was gained, the system could be extended and improved. The prineipal recommendations of the Commission fall into two categories, namcly those to wliRh eft'ect can be given by Miriisterial action either initially or after arrangement with the Racing or Trotting Conferences, and those which will requiro legislative action to make them operable. Under thc tirst. lieading are recommendations in regard to judicial proceedings (racing tribiuials), the establishment of a Stakes Stabilisation Fund, midweek racing, Government inspection of the totalisator, the extension of the bracketing system in respect of galloping events, payment of dividends on inquiry or appeals, redistribution of existing racing and trotting totalisator days, amalgagation of clubs, pooling of profits from tot.alisator meetings to finance all hunt clubs and financial lielp from totalisator clubs out of fractions for liontotalisator meetings, certain restrictions on broadeasting with respect to racing-. In the second category are the recommendations for the legalisa/tion of olf-conrse betting through the totalisator, exemptions from ineome tax of moneys paid to Stakes Stabilisation Funds, certain other exemptions from ineome tax, legalisation of doubles totalisator, removal of limit of three on number of totalisators, telegraphing and posting of totalisator investments (reintroduction of scheme formerly in vogue), addit-ional T9 trotting totalisator days, legalisation of newspaper tipping, publication of dividends, overseas lotteries (means of preventing Kew Zealand liatidnals making investments), aniendments to the Gaming Act, 1908 (decisions on submissions made by the Commissioner "of Police). In regard to the restrictions or suppresion of illegal off-course betting carried on through the tclephone service, the Commission exiiressed the opinion tliat it was possible there may be sufficient authoritv in tlm Post and Tcle-gi-aph Act, 1928, to deal with this matter in the manner recommended by the Commission. If not, the Act should be amended' to take take such power. In due course, it was recommended, statutory ■ recognition should be given to the Racing Advisory Board which in the meantime could be constituted by Ministerial Action. ' Tlie 5s totalisator could be established without legislation, but when an amendment of the Gaming Act was- brought down, pro-

vision should be made for the fraction to be reduced from 6d to 3d. • - Bookmakers outlawed. ' Although bv the Gaming Amendment Act, 1920, the oecupation of a bookmaker was made unJlawful, the business of bookmaking lias thriven in New Zealand, " the report states. 'The measure of its sueeess may be judged from the fact that wherea's approximately £20,000,000 went through tlie totalisators of the country during the 19-15-10 racing year, a sum of £21,000,000, was, with some show of credibility, estimated by the secretary to the Dominion Sportsmem's Associa tiou, as having passed . through the liands of tlie bookmakers. "Despite its magnitude, the correctness of the estimate is supported by tne Police Departnient, Which reports there i_s_ reason to suspect that no fewer thau 700 persons.are at present engaged in oookniaking. The Departnient snsptects1 there are 153 bookmakers. and their agents in Auckland, .192 in Wellington, 02 in Christchurch, 55 in Palmerston Xorth and quite cousiderable numbers in most of the smaller towns. This being so, if off-course betting is to be pennitted at all, the major question evolves as to the means whicb should be adopted fo eliminate this whoj esajo system of illegal bookmaking. flint the system is now bringing the law into disrepute and is . producing other and widespread detrimental conseqnences was conoeded by eomm.on conseut.'; Two alternatives presented themselves for consideration. The lirst was proposed by the Assdciated Churcheii nauiely that all off-course betting should be rigidly suppressed. The efficaey of such a policy was open to the gravest doubt. Whiie off-course betting had the support of the public and was regarded not only as innocuous but also as justiliable, suppression was well nig'h impossible. Any attempt to aehieve that end iipght well require measures of repression that would be provocative of widespread and deep-seated liostility. The Commission considered that for the Wtate to assume the responsibility of providing means for off-course betting would be a grave mistalce. It was uot any true functiou of the State to embark upon any such enterprise and if it did, it would imperil its impartiality in respect of its true functiou, which was to regulate and govern any such practice in the interests of the public , good. Two Opposed Methods. ' The second alternative offered two opposed metliods. The first was to licence bookmakers and the second to authorise the establishment of some system of off-course betting under the control of the two Conferences • by which the money.adventured would pass through the totalisator. The Dojuiimon fcJportsmen's Associatioiq (frankly an association of bookmakers) candidly conceded that if off-course betting could, by some sufficiently comprehensive and efficacious system be catered for so that the requiremcnts of all "who wished to bet off-course could be satisfied, then 'that system beyond all question shoul4 be adopted. The fundamental claim of the association was that *no such system could be devised which would give a service comparable to the services given by bookmakers. Implicit in the association 's proposal for the licensing of bookmakers, the payment by tliem of a duty on betting to the State and for the purpose of providing revenue for racing clube, the payment of a liceuce fee based on the number of telephones employed by.a licensee, was the continuation of two existing concomitants of the present illegal system. The ffrst was a continuance of the present credit system of betting which constituted mueh the greater part of illegal betting, and the second was a continuance of the present illegal system of betting, not at stated odds, but at odds determined by the amount of the dividend ultimately paid on the totalisator. To both of these there were serious objeetions. It was generally and eredibly believed that credit betting resulted in , excessive betting, in unduo poverty and

peculation. Individuals might steal to bet but the numbers who did so were* sniali . eompared with the number who ' felt themselves impelled to steal when under -heavy pressure for the paympnt of bets already made and lost. 'To in-. •dividjials who had* access to funds, threats of disclosure were a powerfui ffactor indueipg dishonesty. "Malacca Case" Becalled. A somewliat siinilar philosophie basic lay at the root of the prohibition for many ye,ars past in force against betting based on totalisator dividends. The reason for it was that if people were to receive or pay, not aceording to deelared odds, but aceording to odds subsequently disclosed by the totalisator, then there was an incentive to do wliat was necessary to produce a desirable fesult upon the totalisator. This promoted further gambliug in that bookmakers were indueed to back upou the totalisator horses which, in the light of bets made off-course, they desired to see pay a minimum dividend. On the other hand, those Who betted with bookmakers were indueed to back upou the totalisator other horses in order to inflate the amount of the dividend expeeted. At its 'best a system of betting upon totalisator odds was provocative of increased gambling. An instanee of its result so tar as manipulation of investments upon the totalisator was concerned, was afforded by a recent case in Napier, laiown as "the Malacca case". There, very large sums were invested upon horses not expected to win in order to inflate the dividend on the horse a person with a conlidence the event justiiied expected to win. A third objection to the licensing of bookmakers was the difticulty of recovei'ing taxation. from them. In addition, there was no assurance that the licensing of a certain number of bookmakers would eliminate illegal bookmaking. The association itself had no eonfidence tliat it would, and experience had shown that it would not. It never could be wise for any State to call into existence or lend recognition by legislation to a class of persons . engaged in an uneconomic oecupation which had dangerous potentialities. However innocuous or ethical betting by individuals in small sums witliiu their means might be it was undesirable that a class should be created whose interest it was to provoke indulgeuce in a luxury by ever-widening groups of the eommunity. This conclusion was of orimary importance because it would bo to disiilay an ignorance of human na- , ture to believe if bookmakers were licensed they would abaudou the system of agency and canvass by which they had thriven in the past. There was every reason to believe that the present canvassing system, despite its illegality, was both extensive and thorough. Off-Course Totalisator Betting Kecommended. "The conclusion Is uneseapable that if a-$5%tein of off-course betting can be devised which will insure that the moneys staked go through the totalisator, . the interests of honesty will be suliserved, active solicitation into the habit of betting will be eliminated, the interests of the sport of racing will be advanced, the greater c-omfort of the race-going public will be secured, and the payment of taxation made certaim . "Any satisfactory &eheme'i3tiiust volve only the deposit systVni^'sitplif^mented by some rigidly controlled system by which the public can make bets in convenient premises off the course. Jt may be tliat the public will become

educated to the adoption of the deposit system. That system has eertainly appealed to the English public and has proved itself a great, sueeess in Britain, as the progress of, a -company known as T'ote Investors Ltd. demonstrates. This is a consummation greatlj' to be "desired. V ; , "At the same time, we are only too cdnseious in respect of all such topics as are now under diseussion of the possibility that our conclusions may prove fallacious. The whole history of gaming has demoustrated that the best con-

sidered conclusions either -prove errone- * ous or prove produetive of unexpected and dertimental cousequences. Discfetiou dictates, thefef ore, that anything we propose or recommend in this relation should be regarded as tentative, and that some authority should be created eharged with the"- responsibility of watching results so that not only * variations and improvements can be given effeet, but radical alterations made where the indications' are that a radical ehauge is necessaTy. ' '