The Sun 42 WYNDHAM STREET, AUCKLAND FRIDAY, DECEMBER 6, 1929 “TIPS” ON THE TELEPHONE

Sun (Auckland), Volume III, Issue 839, 6 December 1929, Page 8

The Sun 42 WYNDHAM STREET, AUCKLAND FRIDAY, DECEMBER 6, 1929 “TIPS” ON THE TELEPHONE

EVER since men learnt to like easy profit, sages have said that a little pleasure may be a dangerous thing. This ancient wisdom is in the process of demonstration within the Auckland Post and Telegraph Office, where departmental officials are holding an inquiry into betting among employees and others at the outside ends of telephone lines. So far, in the reports about the investigation and the reason for it, the word “betting"’ has not been used; instead, there has been reference to conversations over the telephone bjr operators while the Takapuna races were in progress last week-end. But betting is at the bottom of the inquiry and any discreet omission of the term is nothing more nor better than another exercise of the widespread hypocrisy in this country concerning gambling on the capricious achievements of horses on the Turf.

It has been reported that there is a buzz of perturbation in the Auckland telephone and telegraph department over the apparent fact that two wily inspectors discovered in their own way of acquiring information that many operators—about forty, it is said—were conversing through the telephone about the races on the North Shore. There is an allegation that the inspectors tapped the line by the simple process of laying a wire under a carpet. If such were done, as men have sprung traps to catch woodchucks, that which was heard from under the carpet was sufficiently impressive to convince the official listeners-in that the talkers must be put “on the carpet” for having committed a breach of departmental regulations. The result of the inquiry may be left to those responsible for upholding the laws that govern the Public Service. Perhaps the outcome of the investigation will lead to temporary suspension or transference of the indiscreet conversationalists on racing bets and tips. On the other hand the incident may soon be dismissed into oblivion. The decision rests with the departmental administrators. As far as the public is concerned the investigation will afford further proof of the blatant hypocrisy that marks the State’s relationship with and policy regarding gambling. The Government, which in this case means every Administration for years past, denounces with one side of its mouth all forms of illegal gambling, and with the other side silently permits incessant breaches of the law. Moreover, the Government with one hand grabs over half a million pounds sterling every year from the investments piled profligately on the totalisator by a people spoiled by over-indulgence in sport that encourages excessive gambling, and takes with the other hand a considerable.sum from those lilies of the Turf, best known as bookmakers, who are non-existent from the legislators’ point of view. If the Government desires to make an end to hypocrisy and bookmakers alike, it need not place an undue strain on political or administrative wisdom. All that is required to be done with a certainty of imposing an effective restraint on a nefarious practice of gambling is to cut off from telephonic and telegraphic services the able gentlemen who make betting books largely to their own great advantage. Beyond any dispute there is a wide official knowledge of the tribe of bookmakers and their ways. Departmental officials, as well as the public, know the real reason of the remarkable increase of the communication department’s business on race days, which number 319 a year. And they also understand why it is so difficult for telephone users on bureau calls any evening before a race day. In short the whole country is a gambler’s field. What sense is there in pretending that betting is not more prevalent than bad weather in the Dominion? No doubt the people appreciate the fact, but that is not the best reason for tolerating its practice on an extensive legal scale. No benefit, no remedy ever will be gained by anyone railing at weaker brethren. The right thing to do is to eliminate hypocrisy and tackle the evil with a clear conscience.

FREE PASSES FOR COUNCILLORS

THE City Council’s cool assumption that, although it no longer * owns or controls the transport undertaking, its members are still entitled to free tram and bus passes, is just another instance of the council’s inability to forget its proprietary interest in the system. On logical grounds there is no more reason why City Councillors should have passes than there is justification for extension of that privilege to the members of the Mount Albert Borough Council, One Tree Hill Road Board, or any of the several other local bodies in the metropolitan district in which the units of the transport system operate. If City Councillors find that they incur out-of-pocket expenses through travelling on the trams and buses in the course of their duties as councillors, then they are entitled to reimbursement by the council in the ordinary way. It is not clear, however, that a council which has shown itself hopelessly incapable of managing the transport system has still a just claim to the privileges enjoyed when it was actually administering the undertaking. The renewal of the free passes to councillors would simply mean that not only would the Transport Board be bearing the cost of carrying them whenever they were engaged on the City’s business, but also it would be required to carry them when they were about their private affairs as well. It is not difficult to see that the precedent thus established would quickly inspire other urban local bodies to a vigorous demand for similar concessions.

Apparently the Minister of Internal Affairs, the Hon. P. A. de la Perrelle, is disposed to be accommodating toward the council’s request, and he has outlined methods by which the concession, though not now legal, may be legalised by amendments to existing legislation. Christchurch, as well as Auckland, would be affected by these amendments. In Christchurch the trams are controlled by a company, and the council secures passes for the councillors by paying a fairly considerable sum from its own funds each year. This is the only basis on which such a privilege should be legalised, but the passion for free travel, and for other privileges, among New Zealand administrators, whether local or national, is such that members of Parliament could hardly be expected to see the thing in such a light. lustead, the spirit of freemasonry that makes public life so pleasant will weld city councillors and politicians into one grand fraternity of “deadheads.”