Committee Reports > List of Committees > Private > 1929 > Joint Committee on the Betting Act 1926 > Final Report - Betting Act 1926, and the Law relating to the Business of Bookmaking

APPENDIX I.

SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS OF GENERAL O’DUFFY FOR AMENDMENT OF THE EXISTING LAW RELATING TO THE BUSINESS OF BOOKMAKING.

(Supplied by Witness subsequently to his evidence on 21st November, 1928.)

Amendments to Act of 1926.

1. Section 4—second line—strike out the words “and on no other ground whatsoever.” See Q. 10.

2. Section 4—add the following additional grounds of objection:—

(f) unsatisfactory financial circumstances. (Evidence to be produced). Q. 10, 66, 67, 68, 74, 75.

(g) if previously licensed, on proof that applicant has refused or failed to pay bets. Q. 10.

(h) less than 12 months’ residence in Saorstát. Q. 10. 31. 32 and 33.

3. Section 4 (e)—We desire that the words “general character” and “known habits” should be defined. Q. 11.

4. Section 4—Additional condition—that applicant shall be required to produce to the Superintendent a certificate as to his suitability from the Conyngham Club, or some such Club or Association.

5. Section 5—(1) All licences should expire on the same fixed day each year —say, 31st October. Q. 11.

6. Section 5 (2)—Bookmakers’ licences should cost £50. Q. 11.

7. Section 5 (3)—Photo of holder should be attached to each Certificate. In this connection it might be considered advisable to design a form of licence which would last for, say, 5 years with spaces for annual renewal stamps. This would get over question of cost of new photograph annually. Q. 11.

8. Section 8—second line—delete words “and on no other ground whatsoever.” Q. 11, 73.

9. Section 8 (i)—words “disorderly manner” and “large” should be defined. Q. 11.

10. Section 8—We would like a provision inserted which would prevent an applicant who was himself refused a certificate of suitability of premises from carrying on the business in such premises through a relative or other agent, who is only nominally the owner—the real owner and manager being the disqualified person. Q. 11 and Q. 13.

11. Section 8—Add as additional grounds for objection “that there are sufficient licensed premises in district already.” Q. 12, 71, and 72.

12. Section 8—We recommend that the Committee might consider the advisability of disqualifying publicans from holding bookmakers’ licences or registered premises. Q. 14 and Q. 16.

13. Section 9 (1)—Excise duty should be increased to £100 for each premises. Q. 12.

14. Section 10 (2)—The period of 21 days specified herein should be reduced to, say, 7 days. Q. 16 and 17 and 5.

15. Section 10 (5) a—The Superintendent should be entitled to call the local Sergeant or any respectable citizen to give evidence. Q. 17.

16. Section 12 (2)—After word “this” in second line add “or any other” as in second line of Section 12 (1). Q. 17.

17. Section 15 (4)—After word “maintain” in second line, add “inside or outside.” Q. 17, Q. 18, Q. 19 and 41.

This appears to be the proper place to add the following recommendations, as to the manner in which licensed premises should be conducted.

18. That betting transactions in betting offices with persons under 18 years of age be made an offence punishable by severe penalties. Q. 5, 7, 8, 54 and 55.

19. That it be an offence for a bookmaker to allow persons under 18 years of age to remain in registered premises. Q. 5 and 8.

20. That it be an offence to take or send a person under 18 years to a betting office. Q. 5 and 8.

21. Minimum bet should be 2/-. Q. 5, 8, 45, 46, 47.

22. That list betting and paying after results be made an offence. Paying out and setting bets should not be done on the day on which the event to which the bet relates is run. Q. 5 and 8.

23. That calling out of odds on registered premises be made an offence. Q. 5 and 8.

24. That list of runners, starting prices, sporting sheets and literature should not be exhibited on registered premises. Q. 5, 8, 37, 39, 40.

25. That it be an offence for a bookmaker to cause or permit overcrowding or loitering on registered premises. The question of a time limit might be considered, say, 15 minutes. Q. 5, 8, 69 and 70.

26. That it be an offence for persons to loiter or congregate outside registered premises—the police to have power to institute proceedings, if necessary, by arrest. Q. 5 and 8.

27. That persons in receipt of unemployment or outdoor relief should be debarred from betting on registered premises, and that their benefits should cease on proof that a betting transaction has been made by them, or on their behalf, while in receipt of such relief. Q. 5, 8, 76 to 81.

28. That persons who bet with licensed bookmakers should be in a position to recover debts resulting from bets as ordinary debts. Q. 8, 26 and 27.

29. That it be an offence for a bookmaker to commission a person to make, take or enter bets on his behalf. Q. 14.

30. That bookmakers be compelled to give a prescribed and numbered receipt to each customer for each bet, and that such receipt should bear the name and address of the bookmaker. It should be made an offence to issue any docket other than the prescribed and numbered one. Q. 25 and 26.

31. Section 16 (1)—Change business hours to from 10 a.m. to 1 p.m. and from 5 p.m. to 7 p.m. Q. 19, 20, 21.

32. Section 19 (2)—Add after word “Excise” in first line, “or any member of the Gárda Síochána.” Q. 21, 22, 23.

33. Section 19 (3)—Gárda should have power of arrest under this section. Q. 23 and 24.

34. Section 20—Clerks and assistants of bookmakers should be also licensed, and should have all the qualifications required for a bookmaker. Q. 24, 25, 61 to 65.

N.B.—A summary, prepared by other Witnesses, will be found at the beginning of the evidence of such Witnesses.