Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

HOUSE PASSES LICENSING BILL

Fate in Council’s Hands

ABANDONED BY

PRIME MINISTER

Two-Issue Bare Majority Stands (THE SUN’S Parliamentary Reporter) , WELLINGTON, To-day. ’THE Licensing Bill now goes to the Legislative Council to be passed, rejected, or * amended, according to the will of the Dominion’s elder statesmen. In the early hours of this morning the Bill passed its third reading in the House on a division by 39 votes to. 32. Various additional amendments were made during the proceedings in committee, which concluded shortly after 1.30 a.m. The Prime Minister, standing firm on his declaration that he could not support the bare majority on two issues, refused to move that the committee’s report be agreed to. Mr. E. P. Lee, Oamaru, then proposed the motion which was carried on the voices. Mr. Lee also moved the third reading of the Bill. Pressed by members of the Opposition, the Prime Minister would not indicate to the House whether he would sign the recommendation to the Governor-General that the Bill be passed into law, should the Legislative Council approve it.

The committee stage in the House of Representatives had a more or less smooth run, the amendments which had been agreed to in recent negotiation between both sides and the sponsor of the Bill being inserted by the House. Mr. H. E. Holland, Leader of the Opposition, clung to his previously expressed belief that there was no intention of the Prime Minister to send the Licensing Bill to the Statute Book. The amendments, he said, were the “pup” which the Prime Minister had sold the brewers, while the rest of the Bill provided the “gold brick” which the prohibitionists were expected to buy. Mr. Holland thought it was due to the Prime Minister that lie had never on any occasion said that he intended the Bill to go right through, but if this proved to be correct, the time spent in discussing the clauses, and the money involved, were a mere waste. If the Prime Minister would give his assurance that there was no intention of putting the Bill into law, then what was the use of going any further? The Prime Minister said the Leader of the Opposition was in a curious mood, but this he attributed to Mr. Holland’s particular function in the House. He thought he had made the position clear in his statement in the Chamber on the previous evening. With the exception of that portion of the Bill which referred to the bare majority, ho was in favour of the amendments that had been effected. “But,” he went on, “so long as the Bill

to the Governor-General to put the Bill upon the Statute Book?

The reply of Mr. Coates to this question was hasty. He ask§d Sir Joseph to take it in the correct spirit. “There has been a certain phrase in use for the past 15 years,” he said, “and without any disrespect to the right hon. member, and without any intention of appearing to be rude, I would ask him to ‘wait and see.’ ” The House then dealt with the amendments which had been prepared by the Prime Minister in conjunction with the representatives of each side of the question. The first amendment was in connection with the taking of polls for restoration after prohibition had been carried in New Zealand. The clause provided for a continuity of polls for restoration whereas the original clause had provided for only one poll for restoration in the event of prohibition being enforced. This was carried. The provision for a bare-majority decision at licensing polls was agreed to. Restoration Polls Several members found difficulty in understanding the effect of the clause giving Licensing Committees, on the carrying of restoration, power to grant not more than one licence for every complete 500 electors of any district, or not less (if a sufficient number of licenses is applied for), than one for every complete 1,500 electors, instead of for every 1,000, as originally proposed. Mr. D. G. Sullivan (Avon), and Mr. V. H. Potter (Roskiil) disagreed with the amendment, but accepted it because it was a compromise. Mr. Coates said that the provision would satisfy all reasonable-minded people. At present licences could be granted on a maximum ratio of one to 500 electors and a minimum of one to 1,000, and the amendment decreased the minimum number of licences to one in 1.500. Because he did not have the tenure extended to six years, the Prime Minister considered it fair that the clause specifying minimum accommodation to be provided in new licensed premises should be withdrawn. He moved to have the clause struck out. The Prime Minister succeeded in deleting the clause. Hotel Accommodation The clause requiring licensed premises to be provided with sufficient hot water services was withdrawn, Mr. Coates saying that he would reconsider the question. The House agreed to delete the

clause giving Licensing Committees power to impose conditions requiring licensees, on grant or renewal of a licence, to effect alterations or repairs.

Another unopposed amendment extends the right to supply liquor to persons under 21, to any individual in his own home, or in any room or premises to which he is entitled, for the time being, to exclusive possession. Strenuous protests were raised by Labour members to the proposal to place barmaids under the jurisdiction of the police, instead of under the Labour Department as at present.

Mr. Coates assured the House that the department wanted to get rid of the responsibility. He had heard that the possibility of traffic in certificates among barmaids has been mentioned. Whether there was any truth in the story lio was npt prepared to say. It was a long time, since the Act prohibiting the registration of further barmaids had been passed, but barmaids were as good as ever. A new clause moved by Mr. Coates was added 'to the Bill making special provision of the position in present no-licence distriots.- In the event of national prohibition being carried a poll is to be taken in each no-licence district on a proposal to restore licences in that district, simultaneously with a poll on the proposal for national restoration. If‘the proposal to restore licences in a no-Jicence district is carried, but the national poll is in favour of continuance ©f prohibition, the poll in the no-lioenee district is to be of no effect. • If, however, the result of the poll in the no-licence district is against the proposal to restore licences that determination is to be effective, notwithstanding that the result of the Dominion poll may be to restore licences. This special provision is limited to one poll only. Registered Barmen

A further clause proposed by Mr. Coates provided for the registration of barmen after April 1, 1928. Written application for registration as barman must be made to the Commissioner of Police, accompanied by at least two certificates of character, signed by reputable persons. After making inquiries as to the character of an applicant, the commissioner is to enter the applicant’s name in a register of barmen, and to issue to him a certificate of registration. In the case of an offence the court may suspend or endorse the certificate, and if an unregistered barman is employed both he and his employer are liable to a fine of £lO for every day of the offence. This proposal met with strong opposition from the Labour Party, Mr. Fraser protesting against barmen being compelled to get police tickets before being able to follow their calling. “This brings a barman up to the level of a professional man, such as a doctor,” said Mr. Potter, “but according to the Prohibition Party a barman is a dispenser of poison—-of that mustard-coloured conglomeration of dissected delight called beer.” Mr. Lysnar: Do you agree with that? Mr. Potter: Look at me and see if you think I do. After a lengthy discussion the division was taken at 0.40 a.m., and the amendment was carried by 51 votes to 21.

A new clause •was carried substituting a 55 per cent, majority for a threefifths majority in the proposals for restoration in no-licence districts. Mr. J. C. Rolleston moved a new clause providing for the taking of a special poll for restoration in the King Country. Mr. Rolleston’s amendment provided that a poll should be taken over both European and Maori population, with a 55 per cent, majority required for restoration.

Mr. J. McCombs, Lyttelton, moved for the rejection of the amendment on the ground that it involved an appropriation for printing, advertising, etc.,

and on the Speaker reversing the ruling of the Chairman of Committee, that there was no appropriation, the amendment was ruled out.

By this time members were showing signs of weariness and 11 new clauses moved by Mr. Lysnar were rejected without even being read the second time.

The Bill was reported back to the House at 1.40 a.m. and Mr. E. P. Lee moved the third reading, Mr. Coates having declined to do so. Mr. H. E. Holland predicted a violent, but premeditated, death for the Bill which he averred had been deserted by its lawful parent and was now dependent on an unsympathetic step-parent. Several other members put their views on record and the bells rang for the final division at 3.35 a.m. The Prime Minister quickly recorded his vote against the Bill and returned to his bench, where he sat muffled in an overcoat and frowning straight in front of him. In an expectant silence the Sneaker announced that the third reading was agreed to by 39 votes to 32. The Bill was finally passed and the House rose at 3.50 a.m. The third read division, list was as follows: AYES (39) Anderson McKeen Bellringer McLennan Bitchener Macmillan Burnett Martin Dickie H. G. R. Mason J. McC. Dickson Kosworthy Fraser Potter A. Hamilton Ransom J. R. Hamilton Reid Harris Rhodes H. Holland F. J. Rolleston Howard Stewart Hunter Sullivan D. Jones Sykes W. Jones Tapley Jordan Waite Kyle Walter E. P. Lee Wright Linklater A oung McCombs NOES (32) Armstrong Horn Atmore J. A. Lee Bartram Luke Bell Lynsnar Buddo McLeod Campbell J- Mason Coates Xasli J. S. Dickson Parry Eliott Pomare Field J# C. Rolleston Forbes Savage Glenn Seddon Hawken Veitch Henare Ward Hockly Wilford H. E. Holland Williams PAIRS

For: Xgata, Hudson, Smith. Against Uru, Forsyth, Girling.

Permanent link to this item

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/SUNAK19271201.2.9

Bibliographic details

Sun (Auckland), Volume I, Issue 216, 1 December 1927, Page 1

Word Count
1,728

HOUSE PASSES LICENSING BILL Sun (Auckland), Volume I, Issue 216, 1 December 1927, Page 1

HOUSE PASSES LICENSING BILL Sun (Auckland), Volume I, Issue 216, 1 December 1927, Page 1

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert