MORE RACING.

Taranaki Daily News, 12 October 1920, Page 5

MORE RACING.

PROPOSAL IN NEW BILL. PLEA FOR EXTRA PERMITS. 'OPPONENTS' STONEWALL TACTICS. (By Wire.—Parliamentary Reporter.) Wellington, Last Night. Mr. Hunter's Gaming Amendment Bill is apparently going to provide the House with a long night's work. It appears that on a division Mr. Hunter can secure a majority of from eight to twelve in favor of the increase that he proposes in the number of totalisator permits, but the opponents of the Rill are in earnest, and they have fortiiird themselves with a very long list of amendments to be moved at the committee stage. They can keep their stonewall going for a long time if they wish to do so. In moving the second reading, Mr. Hunter did not occupy time with arguments. He probably realised that the members of the House had made up their minds one way or the other already, and that the vote was the thing that counted. He pointed out that the re-distribution of permits was the alternative to the issue of extra permits, since many of the country districts admittedly were not getting their fair share of racing under present conditions. The Minister for Internal Affairs, who followed, made a rather involved statement of opinion. He stated that he would vote against the Bill because it was not in the interests of racing. * If the Bill did not pass, he said, there must be a re-distribution. Then he proceeded to suggest that the number of extra permits should not be limited to 3S, as proposed in the Bill, but should be left to the discretion of the Minister, who should have power, if extra permits were to be issued at all, to issue them wherever required, in consultation with the racing authorities. Mr. L. M. Isitt had the floor after Mr. Anderson. He is leading the opposition to the Bill, and he had muck to say about the evils of gambling and the enormous growth of the turnover of the totalfsator. The debate degenerated into a stonewall.

THE DISCUSSION. THIRTY-EIGHT MORE DAYS. REDISTRIBUTION QUESTION. By T«l«craph.—-Press Aisociatlon. Wellington, Last Night. In the House of Representative!* tonight, Mr. G. Hunter (Waipawa) moved the second reading of the Gaming Amendment Bili (No. 2), which, he said, was the outcome of a recent conference. The Bill, which had recently been before the House, proposed to increase the days of race meetings by 68. This increase was made up of '27 racing days, i"> trotting meetings, and 8 hunt club meetings. As a result of further negotiations it was agreed to reduce the increase to 33, made up of 10 racing days, 20 trotting meetings, and eight Hunt club meetings, Tiiese increases were, he considered, justified by the increase in population, and were the only alternative to a re-djiatrtbution. The Racing Conference Hid not want to resort to a re-distribution, but if the Bill did not pass, a re-distribution would be necessary to give country districts justice. The Bill was a moderate one, was reasonable in the proposition, ami the distribution proposed was an equitable one. He moved the second reading, and asked the Premier to assist him to pass the Bill through all its stages at that sitting. Mr. L. M. Isitt (Christchurch North), in opposing the Bill, said he cotold not understand how the" member who introduced the Bill was «atisfled with 38 permits, when he thought 68 were required. If race meetings were a good thing, then why did he not stand for 58? Either racing and gambling, which followed racing, was a good thing or it was not a good thing. Why did racing men seek to pass legislation to restrict gambling? Why did they seek to do away with the or punish Lhe Chinaman when he played pakapoo? His contention was that gambling was i an evil thing, and it was no answer to say that it permeated all our commercial transactions.

HUGE "TOTE" FIGURES. To show how racing had taken a hold on the people of New Zealand, Mr. Isitt stated that .during the last 28 years we put through the totalisator £58,510,202, and during the last eight years we put through £35,055,642. To show how rapidly the grip of racing was seizing the people he said a return put on the table of the House a few days ago showed that last year alone we put through nearly nine millions of money. If things were normal this, he said : , would be enough; but having just come through a terrible ordeal it was specially significant. This tendency to gamble was especially dangerous, because it was prone to lead to anarchy and revolution. Working men were the most liable, because they were victims of the craze. They lost money needed for more necessary purposes, and they then became discontented and desperate, and while in that state of mind became an easy prey to a life of anarchy and revolution. If all this expenditure in Tacing resulted in any good he might be disposed to look upon it more tolerably, but the good that it diet was fictitious. Ha asked Mr. Hunter to say in his reply whether he did not consider excessive gambling an evil, whether gambling in the Dominion was not now excessive, whether 38 additional permits would not increase gambling, and whether, at a time such as this, it was not the duty of every .patriotic citizen to encourage the people to practise thrift and caution. REDISTRIBUTION FAVORED. The Hon.. G. J. Anderson (Minister of Internal Affairs), believed the existing inequitable distribution of permits was the cause of this demand for extra permits. If the House agreed to increase permits there should be a redistribution, but his persrfnal opinion was that a re-distribution ought to take place before an increase was talked of. If the increase was agreed upon, then the fairest way was not to fix a given number, but to leave it to the Department to go into the matter, and grant permits according to the increases in population. There were <J7 application* tov permit! ia hi* Ufigi, ss£

how could alt these be satisfied witK 38 permits? Hie suggested that the member in charge of the Bill should' leave the increases to the Minister and the racing authorities. He was fond of the Bpcrrt of racing, and lie did no» want to see anything dene to intarfera ' with it; kut if increases were made on the basis of this Bill, he feared it would interfere with the sport, and for that reason he would vote againtt the Bill. Mr. R. ?. Hudson (Motueka) said he would support the Bill as a measure of justice (o the outlying districts, which Were ut present unfairly* treated as against the cities in the matter of ra«« ing. "FACILITIES FOR GAMBLING." .Mr. J. McCombs (Lyttelton) commented on the special facilities given tp Mr. Hunter to get his Bill through, but which were denied to Labor Bills bearing- on matters of greater importance to the people of the Dominion. It -would in future be_ futile for the Premier to go out and 'preach to toe people production and still more production, when he thus provided facilities for gambling. Could it ever be said that gambling encouraged production? TBe Gorenawnt must take full responsibility for blocking legislation needed by the people, and this must shake the confidence of the people in the Government's sincerity when they appealed for more production. At a time when Auckland vat short of coal, when they could get no lighting or heating, the Government was wasting tons of coal to run special trains to and from the Avondale nee meeting. Gambling kept in idleness some of the worst elements in society, and for that reason the people of the Dominion werl- against an increase of gambling. Figures had been placed before the House to show bow gambling was on the increase, and he sinply. marvelled that any Government conld, under these circumstances, give special facilities for passing a Bill such as this. TO BRIGHTEN LIFE. Mr. W. D. Lysnar (Gisborne) said he was not a racing man, but he would not say to other people that they should not patronise this sport. He would flapport additional permits to trotting and hunt club meetings, because they encouraged the breeding of horses and were most useful to the country. Gambling could not be stopped by iaw; therefore, it would be better to legalise it and regulate it. Mr. M. J. Savage (Auckland West) would support the Bill, because he believed it to be right in principle. He wanted to brighten the Kves of the people, and he did not believe in a race of long' faces. Horse racing was not the root of gambling, life and business in every phase was a gajnble, and those who were opposing this measure did nothing to lighten the load of the masses. The workers were not poor because of what they had spent in gambling, but because tbey did not get a -fair share of what they earned. If this Bill passed, however, he considered its administration should not be left in the hands of the Racing Conference; I it should be placed under some impartial tribunal.

MR. S. Q. SMITH'S VIEWS. Mr. S. G. Smith (Taranaki) said he recognised there was a demand in many parte of the Dominion for more peraits, and this was because of the present unfair allocation of permits. The whole province of Taranaki only had the game number of permits as Auckland city had, and he thought-the Bill wag the onb/ possible means by which that wrong might be righted. Mr. F. N. Bartram (Grey Lynn) said the Bill would not increase gambling, because those who went to a race meeting were not gamblers in the strict senseof the term. He would support the Bill because he wanted to see the people of the country get as much out of life as possible. At the same time, if tie racing authorities did not keep their hands clean, then Labor would not continue their support. If they did not provide proper accommodation for those whom they employ, and if they did not permit jockeys to form a union, then Labor would oppose them just as heartily as they supported them that night. Mr. 1). Jones (Kaiapoi) said he was prepared to let the permits remain where they were, but he would not consent to an increase. The debate was still in progress at' 2 a.m, when the telegraph office closed.