HC Deb 11 April 1932 vol 264 cc548-9
46. Sir W. DAVISON

asked the Prime Minister whether it will be provided in the terms of reference to the Royal Commission which the Government purpose to set up to inquire into the law relating to lotteries, etc., that it is desirable that a report on the matter shall be presented within a period not exceeding four months so that the existing anomalies of the law relating to lotteries may be remedied without delay; and whether the Government has definitely decided that, pending the report of the Royal Commission, no facilities are to be given for the further stages of the Lotteries Bill, ordered by the House of Commons to be brought in on the 22nd March?

The PRIME MINISTER

The terms of reference of the Royal Commission are under consideration. It would be impracticable to suggest any time limit within which the Commission are to report but I have no doubt that they will endeavour to expedite their inquiry so far as the complexity of the issues involved will permit. It would be within the discretion of the Commission to submit interim reports should they consider it expedient to do so. Pending the receipt of their report it would be inappropriate I think for legislation to proceed on one aspect of the problem which they are to investigate.

Sir W. DAVISON

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that it is on the question of lotteries and sweepstakes that the public is primarily interested, and that is bringing the law into disrepute, and will he request the Royal Commission to report on this matter in the first instance, as it has no relation to street betting and the totalisator whatever?

The PRIME MINISTER

I think, if the hon. Gentleman looks into the details of the problem, he will find that he cannot separate one section of betting from another.

Captain CROOKSHANK

Is it not a fact that the introduction of the Bill by the hon. Gentleman was, in fact, a sort of lottery itself, and that he has lost?

Sir W. DAVISON

Is it not a fact that certain Members' mathematical education is defective, and they think that a large majority in favour of a Bill signifies disapproval of its contents by the House?