HC Deb 05 May 1960 vol 622 cc1373-6
Mr. Vosper

I beg to move, in page 3, line 6, after "writing", to insert "in the prescribed form".

Perhaps we might take the next Amendment at the same time, Mr. Deputy-Speaker, in page 3, line 21.

Mr. Deputy-Speaker

Yes, if that is convenient to the House.

Mr. Vosper

The words provided for in the first Amendment are inserted in response to the request of the right hon. Member for South Shields (Mr. Ede), as are several other Government Amendments on the Notice Paper tonight. Clause 3 is the new Clause dealing with the registration of agents. The right hon. Gentleman suggested that the words on the certificate to be issued by the bookmaker to the agent should be in a prescribed form and that the register to be kept by the bookmaker should be in a prescribed form also.

The first Amendment achieves his first purpose and enables my right hon. Friend to prescribe the form of words to be used on the certificate. The second Amendment will prescribe the form of register to be kept.

Mr. Ede

I thank the right hon. Gentleman for having carried out his pledge. The need for what is now pro- posed was illustrated by the hon. Member for the Isle of Thanet (Mr. Rees-Davies) this afternoon when he spoke about people having hundreds of slips of paper, on the assumption, apparently, that anybody who produced a slip of paper would be able to claim that he was duly authorised.

I take it that in the regulations the form will be set out. I assume that after that the law stationers and similar people will print the words in that form so that the authenticity of the document can be recognised. I know that that is not the responsibility of the right hon. Gentleman, but I imagine that that is the way in which he expects the matter to be dealt with.

There will be a similar prescription in respect of the register in the regulations. Apparently, law stationers follow these matters very carefully. Although no obligation is placed on anyone, I assume that they will publish registers that will enable people to comply with the law.

Mr. Vosper

In so far as I am responsible for these matters, I think that the right hon. Gentleman is correct in all his assumptions.

Amendment agreed to.

Further Amendment made: In page 3, line 21, at end insert "in the prescribed form ".— [Mr. Vosper.]

9.0 p.m.

Mr. Vosper

I beg to move, in page 3, line 37, at the end to insert: or, in the case of offences under subsection (2) or subsection (3) of this section, on a second or any subsequent conviction under the same subsection, to a fine not exceeding fifty pounds". It would be possibly for the convenience of the House if we also discussed the Amendment in the name of the right hon. Member for Smethwick (Mr. Gordon Walker), namely, in page 3, line 37, at the end to insert: on his first conviction, and on a second conviction to a fine not exceeding twenty-five pounds, and on any subsequent conviction to a fine not exceeding fifty pounds and to be disqualified from holding a bookmaker's permit or a betting agency permit". They both cover the same point.

Mr. Deputy-Speaker

I think that that would be for the convenience of the House, but the Amendment in the name of the right hon. Member for Smethwick has not been selected for a vote. All the points may be discussed on the Amendment in the name of the Home Secretary.

Mr. Vosper

Thank you, Mr. Deputy-Speaker.

This Amendment again relates to the Clause dealing with registration of agents. Here we are concerned with penalties. Under the new Clause I introduced in Committee, a person is liable, whether for an offence committed by the principal bookmaker in not issuing a certificate or committed by the agent for not having a certificate, to a penalty of £10 for the first and any subsequent offences. Several of my hon. Friends and hon. and right hon. Members opposite took the view that this was not sufficient, and I think that the right hon. Member for South Shields (Mr. Ede) moved an Amendment about the matter.

I have reconsidered this point, and the result of my reconsideration is the Amendment. I propose that the penalty for the first offence should be a fine of not more than £10 and for the second and subsequent offences a fine not exceeding £50. The right hon. Member for Smethwick wishes to go a little further in one respect and not quite so far in another. For the second offence, he proposes a maximum penalty of £25, but for subsequent offences he considers that a term of imprisonment should be possible. [HON. MEMBERS: "No."] I am sorry; the disqualification of his permit would follow.

Mr. Wigg

My right hon. Friend's Amendment proposes for a second offence a fine not exceeding £25 and, on a subsequent conviction, a fine not exceeding £50 and disqualification.

Mr. Vosper

I am grateful to the hon. Member for Dudley (Mr. Wigg) for his correction. The difference between us is that my Amendment does not prescribe disqualification for any offence, whereas the right hon. Member's Amendment does.

In my opinion, this offence does not quite compare with the offences under Clause 8 for which disqualification is provided. I do not think that the failure, possibly unintentional, of a bookmaker to issue a certificate or to bring it up to date should entail the penalty of disqualification. However, as I pointed out in Committee, it would always be possible on application for the renewal of a bookmaker's certificate for the justices, having knowledge of one or more offences of this nature, to refuse to renew a permit. There is therefore the ultimate sanction of refusal to renew, although I would not suggest that it should be included as a penalty. Therefore, I believe that the solution which I have put forward—a maximum of £10 on the first occasion and a maximum of £50 on the second and subsequent occasions—is the right compromise and an advance over the proposal I made in Committee.

Mr. Ede

I thank the Joint Undersecretary for having introduced a grading. Perpetual fines of £10 would soon reduce the Clause to something of a farce. I am glad to know that the right hon. Gentleman has now moved straight away from £10 to £50 for the second and any subsequent offence. My right hon. Friends and I were prepared to have an intermediate stage by a grading of £10, £25 and £50 and, accompanying the £50, disqualification.

While I accept the Amendment and shall not vote against it, we do not want the Clause to be treated with derision by the people who are to be registered or to keep registers under it. When a person offends three times or more, it can hardly be said that he does it by inadvertence. We meet that with the grading of the penalties.

I hope that when a person comes up for the renewal of his permit after he has had three convictions, the justices who have to administer the law will seriously consider whether he is a sufficiently responsible person to be granted the privilege which the permit is. I thank the right hon. Gentleman for at least having met us a good part of the way.

Amendment agreed to.