HOTEL LICENSES

Evening Star, Issue 21743, 11 June 1934, Page 11

HOTEL LICENSES

MORE EQUAL DISTRIBUTION PROVISION FOR TOURIST TRADE PROSPECT OF EARLY LEGISLATION [Special to tub ‘ Star.’] WELLINGTON, June 11. There is a prospect of licensing legislation being submitted to Parliament by the Government during the coming session. Ministers have given no direct indications of this development, but there are signs that the whole question of anomalies > in the licensing law is under the consideration of permanent officers, who will advise Cabinet regarding suggested changes. Licensing legislation is always regarded as a difficult and delicate matter to be handled by Governments, but the justification for raising the issue at present is that this attitude in the past has led to very serious anomalies in the licensing system, and that it is completely out of line with present-day conditions. New Zealand, for instance, wishes to develop the tourist attractions, and the argument is put forward that suitable hotel accommodation is not likely to be provided when there is a triennial risk of the license being lost. This is one aspect which will receive attention. UNEQUAL DISTRIBUTION, Changes in the incidence of the dominion’s population, and the revolution in transit which has followed the general use of the motor' car, have accentuated the inequality in the distribution of licenses throughout New Zealand. The old-time gold-mining boom on the West Coast is now merely a matter of history, but most' of the hotels which sprang up to give the necessary accommodation and refreshment for large populations are still in existence. Hokitika is stated to be 1 served by over twenty hotels, though its population to-day is under 3.000. The Borough Council receives £4O for each publican’s license within its area, and Hokitika consequently enjoys a revenue of £Bl2 per annum from this source. Yet the city of Palmerston North, with a population of about 22.000, has only sufficient hotels to secure for its local authority a license revenue of £732. The proportion of licensed houses to population is steadily declining In the year 1902 there was One hotel to every 551 inhabitants, but the latest figures show that there are 1,300 people to each license, and that owing to unequal distribution, the disparity is much greater than the figures indicate. SELECT COMMITTEE’S PROPOSALS. A Special Committee of the House of Representatives which overhauled licensing legislation ten years ago placed redistribution in the forefront of its recommendations. It stated: “ No more licenses are required in the dominion. It is, however, necessary that there should be a redistribution of licenses more in accordance with .the needs of the population in the various districts. Before a Licensing Committee consents to any redistribution, the consent of a majority of the inhabitants in the vicinity of the proposed new site should be obtained.” This committee also considered that the license fees should be revised. While local authorities should continue to receive the £4O per license, its recommendation was that the licenses should he placed in three categories according to their value, and that additional fees should be charged, the excess over £4O to be paid into the Consolidated Fund. The element of permanence for licenses was also the subject of a recommendation, this committee beingof opinion that there should be a nine year interval between licensing polls, and that if Prohibition was carried, it should not operate until four years had elapsed. RESTORATION VOTE LOST Another anomaly which lias crept into the licensing laws is that the automatic operation of the Boundary Commission in readjusting the electorates after each census, in line with the distribution of population, is liable to deprive the electors of “ dry ” areas of the right to vote for restoration. This has occurred in Canterbury. The old Ashburton electorate carried Prohibition when the issue was a local one, and the hotels duly disappeared. However, for some , years those who believed in restoration had a regular opportunity

of voting for it. Then, as the growing population of the North Island gradually deprived the South Island of some of its electorates, Ashburton, the “dry” area, became merged with adjoining areas, and the new constituency of Mid-Oanterbury, which absorbed the large town of Ashburton; provides only for a vote on the national licensing issue. The people of Ashburton can only secure a return to license if the law is altered, because they never get the opportunity nowadays of voting “ restoration,” as thiS is an issue about which the rest of the constituency is not concerned. Here, it is expected, is an opportunity for revision of the law during the coming session. Last session there was piecemeal legislation to remedy one deficiency in the licensing law, due entirely to modern developments. This measure enables the Bay of Plenty Licensing Committee to waive, in one specific instance, the limitation of one mile on the transfer of a license. This was to meet the, position of an hotel which, owing to the construction of an improved road between Gisborne and Opotiki, is now nine miles away from the traffic it had formerly served. The special legislation will enable the license to be moved to the new road, but an attempt to make, this provision general in respect to similar conditions in the same licensing district was unsuccessful. MR COATES’S EXPERIENCE.

The present Minister of Finance endeavoured in 1927, when he was Prime Minister, to carry out some of the recommendations of the Parliamentary Committee regarding extension of tenure of hotels, accompanied by definite obligations for improved accommodation. The measure was so seriously altered in committee .that Mr Coates withdrew it, pointing out that it would be unfair to licensees to force them to incur heavy expenditure after the committee had defeated the clause for extension of tenure. The extraordinary course was then taken by a Government supporter, Mr E. P. Lee (Oamaru), of moving the subsequent stages of the highly amended Bill, and it passed the House of Representatives by 39 votes to 32. Then trouble ensued with the Legislative Council, which adopted a 52i per cent, majority for the national licensing poll, and as the Lower House would not agree to such a, change—it had inserted the bare majority in the Government Bill—the measure had to be dropped. Mr Coates was not intimidated by the way in whigh the House got out of hand over his Licensing Amendment Bill, and ho brought it forward again in the > following session.. As the personnel‘of the House had not changed in the interim, it was not altogether surprising that amendments were again made to which he took objection. Prohibition sympathisers wanted to-see it passed in the modified form, and the unusual spectacle was witnessed of the Bill’s original author voting against the motion for the third reading. The present Prime Minister ranged himself with Mr Coates on this occasion, and the third reading motion failed by just one vote. The present House has not been troubled by strong feelings over the licensing issue, and it is thought that a moderate programme of reform in the licensing law would have a fair chance of acceptance. There is every chance of the experiment being tried.