MORE RACING OPPOSED.

Taranaki Daily News, 10 March 1921, Page 4

MORE RACING OPPOSED.

ECONOMIC ASPECT STRESSED. EVIDENCE BEFORE COMMISSION. By Telegraph.—Press Association. Christchurch, Last Night. Objections to the proposals to increase the nuifiber of totalizator permits was made before the Racing Commission by Mr. L. M. Isitt, who said he wished to urge members of the commission to exercise their powers in the economic interests of the Dominion and to reallocate the existing permits. The 191# commission had been appointed with the purpose of lessening permits and gambling, and he contended that the eommis* sion had acted against the wishes of the House and in diametrical opposition to the purpose for wliTch it was appointed. As representative of a big city he urged the commission to take away permits from the large cities. The heads of big firms were seriously of opinion that the number of racing days was a financial detriment

Mt. Isitt begged the Commission to take away permits from the large centres. Race meetings were actually a curse in Christchurch. If one went round a number of large firms one would find that the heads of these concerns were seriously of the opinion that the number of racing days was a financial detriment. Within a fortnight £1,300.600 was spent in gambling in Christchurch and Auckland. Did the Commission think that a healthy state of a flairs? Did they think it was for the economic good of the people (o give another fifty permits to make up any manifest lack there might be of racing facilities. Mr. F. Earl, K.C. (chairman of the Commission), said the Commission had not lost sight of the economic aspect. Most of what Mr. Isitt said had been fully appreciated by the Commission before coming to Christchurch. The Rev. North said racing clubs had committed public indecency in asking for more permits. The country was suffering a sharp slump, yet here was a demand for the worst form of extravagance in existence. The Commission was extravagant, and as a taxpayer and citizen he suggested that the cost should be levied against the clubs that clamored for it, und not against the throats of the poor. There was something grasping in the demand for more permits, synchronising with the suppression of the bookmaker. The bookmaker had been suppressed through the anti-gambling sentiment of the. country, and now the clubs demanded an extension of their monopoly, which was really for the benefit of rich men’s stables. The bookmakers were not suppressed that the clubs might grow fat. The racing authorities refused to recognise the primal fact that there must be a huge reduction in extravagance, but they seemed to aim at an indefinite extension. He referred to the staggering increase in the .totalisator turnover, and submitted that any increase of permits would be .against, the great interests of the country. Christchurch was stricken with over-racing, and the least thing the Commission could do was to suppress two clubs. The obliteration of racing revenue from the Government’s balance-sheet would be economically a most wholesome, thing. Any proposal to increase permits without the sanction of Parliament would be bitterly resent©!. Mr. R. W. Shallcrass, secretary of the Sports Protection League, said the league hoped additional permits would be granted, and the league would make further representations to the Commission if necessary. The Commission adjourned.