Where Did Football Pools Get Their Paper?

Chronicle (Levin), 16 June 1949, Page 6

Where Did Football Pools Get Their Paper?

Received Wednesday, 7 p.m. . . LONDON, June 14. Inirnediately Parliament resumes it is likely that questions will be asked as to where the Football Pool Proihoters ' Assoeiation obtained sufficient paper to bnable them to send out 10,000,000 circulars appealing to their subseribers to protest against reeent increases in 'football pool taxation. Ten leading pools companie3 are associated in tliis campaign whieh ineiuded, in addition to the despatch of circulars, a.n advertising campaign estimated to cost £40,000. The pools, beUreen them, have a tremendous mailing list and they are using this to eircularise an estimated 10,000,000 people asking them to write to their members o± Parliament protesking against the pools' taxation. Taxation on pools at the rate of 10 per cent. was first impused by Mr. Dalton in his interim Budget in 1947. It was later increased by Sir Stafford Cripps to 20 per cent. and then to 30 per cent. In their eireular the pool promoters quote a statement by Sir Stafford Cripps in whieh he said that "pools' promoters seem to have been completely undisturbed by the increase in tax. ' ' They appeal to . their subseribers to "show the Chancellor how wrong he is. " by writing immediately to their local members of Parliament. To assist them in doing this, a full list of members of Parliament, with their private addresses, is enelosed with each pamphlet. It is estimated that the cost of postage alone on this circular will be £40,000 but the question whieh immediately arises is where the promoters, wlio are rigidly rationed in their supplies, obtained sufficient paper to issue 10,000,000 pamphlets. Each oue of them is folded into eight pages, 'poeket size, and printed in two colours. The campaign is likely to have considerable repereussions for rightly or wrongly, the promoters are tahing the line that the Chancellor is endeavouring by penal taxation, to restrict one of the diversions of the ordinary wage earner. On the other liand it is likely to redireet public attention to the whole (question of the football pool svsteni, its profits and the amount of labour it absorbs. There has already been considerable adverse comment in some newspapers upon the fact that two pools companies outside the Promoters' Assoeiation, are now endeavouring to run foreeasts upon results of Australian soccer matches. This, it is claimed, destroys the last pretence that football pool forecasting depends "in * any way upon slcill or a knowledge of form, as all of the Australian teams are completely unknown in Britain. Last Saturday, when coupons for the ilrst series of Australian matches wero issued by the two lirnis concerned, flve out of 33 matches were cancelled and there was a reorganisation of the draw whieh was not received by the pools firms until after the coupons were printed.