§ 62. Mr. Arthur Lewisasked the Secretary of State for the Home Department what, at the latest most convenient stated date, was the asset value of the Horserace Totalisator Board; to what extent he estimates the Exchequer funds would benefit if these were sold off by public auction; and if he will take action to sell the Totalisator Board.
§ Mr. CarlisleThe Board's Consolidated Balance Sheet recently published showed that at 31st March, 1971, the Board's fixed and current assets totalled £1,966,205, and that the total net assets were £822,312. Proceeds of a sale of these assets would not accrue to the Exchequer. My right hon. Friend has no power to order such a sale.
§ Mr. Arthur Lewisasked the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether he has received the communication from the hon. Member for West Ham, North, dated 2nd December, 1971, together with a letter from his constituent Mr. M. J. Coughlan of Forest Gate, E.1, making complaints against his Department for unfairness in dealing with the horserace and betting industry; what action he has taken or intends taking to deal with these problems; and whether he will make a statement.
§ Mr. CarlisleThe answer to the first part of the Question is, Yes. As regards the remainder of the Question, my right hon. Friend will give due consideration to all representations which are made to him concerning the provisions of the Horserace Totalisator and Betting Levy Boards Bill.
163W
§ Mr. Arthur Lewisasked the Secretary of State for the Home Department (1) whether he will give a detailed list of the persons and organisations whom he interviewed before preparing his Horse-race Totalisator and Betting Levy Boards Bill; whether these included representatives of the local authorities or their associations; and what organisation or body of persons requested him to increase the number of betting shops even where need has not been proven;
(2) whether he will give a detailed list of the persons and organisations whom he deemed necessary to be consulted for the purpose of preparing his Horserace Totalisator and Betting Levy Boards Bill.
§ Mr. CarlisleI have nothing to add to the reply which I gave to a similar Question from the hon. Member on 8th December.ߞ[Vol. 827, c.324.]
§ Mr. Arthur Lewisasked the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether he will appoint an independent inquiry into all aspects of the financing and taxation of the horserace and betting industry and, in particular, into the profits and tax payments of bookmakers and the Horserace Totalisator Board.
§ Mr. CarlisleNo.
§ Mr. Arthur Lewisasked the Secretary of State for the Home Department why, in the year 1970–71, the Totalisator Board was relieved of paying its dues to the Horserace Levy Board.
§ Mr. CarlisleThe contribution determined by my right hon. Friend's predecessor was made subject to the board's ability to pay, and was consequently remitted by my right hon. Friend when the board's accounts for the year showed a deficit.
§ Mr. Arthur Lewisasked the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will appoint as members of the Horserace Totalisator Board representatives of practising bookmakers in order to improve the administration of the board.
§ Mr. CarlisleMy right hon. Friend will continue to appoint as members of the Horserace Totalisator Board, persons with knowledge and experience of the horse-racing and financial worlds.
§ Mr. Arthur Lewisasked the Secretary of State for the Home Department 164W whether he is aware of the concern felt at the proliferation of betting shops; and whether he will list the powers of licensing magistrates to refuse licences for betting shops for want of local need.
§ Mr. CarlisleThe number of betting offices has been declining annually since 1st June, 1968. The powers of the licensing authorities to refuse licences for such offices on grounds of insufficient demand are contained in paragraph 19(b)(ii) of Schedule 1 to the Betting, Gaming and Lotteries Act, 1963.
§ Mr. Arthur Lewisasked the Secretary of State for the Home Department why he will not introduce legislation to enable bookmakers to obtain betting-shop licences without the licensing magistrates having powers to refuse applications for want of local need, and to ensure that all forms of application from betting-shop licensees are placed upon the same basis for granting and refusal, irrespective of who makes the application.
§ Mr. CarlisleBecause this could lead to an uncontrolled proliferation of betting offices; whereas all that the public interest requires is that the Horserace Totalisator Board should be given an opportunity of competing with the bookmakers in a field in which they have now established what amounts to an exclusive position.