PARLIAMENT

Ashburton Guardian, Volume XLV, Issue 10169, 26 July 1924, Page 6

PARLIAMENT

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.

RENTS. RESTRICTION BILL. (Per Press Association.) WELLINGTON, July 25 The House met at 2.30. Notice to introduce the knowing Bills was given:—Coal Mines Nationalisation (Mr Holland), Unemployed Workers (Mr Eraser), Industrial Conciliation, and Arbitration Act Amendment (Mr Monteith), Housing Act Amendment (Mr Eraser). „,..., The Hon. G. J. Anderson, Minister of- Labour, moved the second reading of the Rent Restriction Bill. In so doing he explained that the duration of the present law was by the Bill extended to August 31, 1925. Clause 3 renders inoperative any agreement between landlord and tenant by which the tenant purports to contract himself out of the protection of the Act. Bv Section 6 of the War Legislation Amendment Act, 1916,' "standard rent," computed for a period of years, can' be fixed at 8 per centum of the capital value as on August 3, 1914, only ureases where the standard rent as originally fixed (that is by referenceto rent then actually payable) is less than 8 per centum of such capital value. This provision is construed to involve ascertainment of rent payable on August 3. 1914, and in some cases this information is not readily accessible. It is proposed by Clause 4 or the Bill to enable a landlord at his option to elect to fix the standard rent in the first instance either by reference to rent actually payable- as aforesaid or at 8 per centum on tne then capital value. This provision dees not affect the jurisdiction of a Magistrate on application made under section 20 of the Housing Amendment Act 1920, to increase the standard rent so as to allow a net return of 7 per centum of capital value as on August 3, 1924. Continuing, the Minister explained that there were certain cases where by reason of changes in ownership or tenancy it was difficult to ascertain the rent payable m respect of a dwelling house on August 3, 1924 Clause S provides for the facts being ascertained by a Stipendiary Magistrate who, if he cannot ascertain the facts, may fix the standard rent by reference to the capital value. Mr Wilford said the Bill was ex- ; tremely urgent. If it was not passed - there would be thousands of evictions - in Wellington. There was, however, - still a defect in the Bill, namely, it failed to provide against an owner who declared to a Magistrate that he re- . quired the house for his own use and } then, as scon as the Court made an j order, that owner immediately sold tfcp house or let it to someone else at , a higher rental. Coses of tins kind . vsere difficult to check, but it was a point which required some safeguard. 1 The real cause of the housing short-i-e was the cost of building and tJie ' Board of Trade was responsible for * this excessive cost more than anyone J else by imposing unnecessary rostnc- «• tion's on the supply of building ma- I

torial. __.. —Mr McKeen said the Bill was very well so far as it went, but he would like to - see the Government go into the whole question of building houses thoroughly, organising the building trade and resources for the purpose The Hon. B\ Buddo expressed the ( opinion that rent restriction legislation would have to be continued until the house -shortage was overcome. Mr Fraser said it was regrettable that there was" a crying need for a Jontinuation of the present legislacaoii. If it were allowed to lapse hundreds of people in Wellington alone would immediately be put out of their houses. The Hon. C. J. Parr said the difficulty was to see what could be done or if anything should be done i for tenants who voluntarily gave up tnerr houses at the request of landlords. An objection to the Bill was, of course, , that it and similar restrictive measures had stopped speculative building. He supported the Bill, which, however,- he felt was only palliative. Mr Forbes condemned the shortage of money in the State Advances Department. The position meant that the Department was practically closed down. It was hopeless for many ap- ; plicants to get any money within a reasonable time. , Mr Maseey ouoted the Government s record in the matter of house building. He recently saw some fine houses in Auckland, costing £770 exclusive of site, which were being paid for at the rate of 35s weekly. Mr Wilford: That is too much. Mr Massey said he knew it was. but there was no doubt the cost of building was coming down. He recently, heard of a house built at Karon for £.OBO, and the owner was now paying for it at the rate of 17s 6d weekly. At Napier nice bouses were built for £650. In some towns the shortage m houses -as IHna overtaken, but it did not Appear to be so in Wellington. He Id not intend to let the Advances Department stand still They had .Jentv of funds, 3* millions 111 hand 'or the next twelve months, but he ,vas not going to sanction anything : n the shape of a boom So fai as

nrauce was concerned, he rouia not , olav fast and loose with it. He always . was willing to borrow for an urgent •virpose, such as housing but he could ( borrow unlimited millions. It was ; -T-.t safe to do so. He must keep the ( -redit of the country right, and that , !,« was doing, as was proved by the ,rrod terms on which recent loans w <• , 4& in Britain. So far as ho could , . applicants for loans from the Vewere- steadily being reduced. , The debate was continued by Mess! 8 , Tordan. Field. Corrigan, Sidey, Map!Wide, and Edie, and was proceeding , rT.Mi'thft House rose at 5.30 p.m. The House resumed at 7.d<>. Mr Sullivan, continuing the debate ™ the Bent Restriction Bill, expressed .%b>asure at the re-introduction of the but urged that more should Z done under the Housing Act to provide more houses for the people The Minister, replying, said a good ,W of the trouble to-day was that n ; desired houses built on a too oxnensive scale. No other country had don? £ much as New Zealand had ■W» during the past five years to prorWo vo-kers with homes. Under present conditions there was no mducemer.t r o" the private capitalist to build wT«ri/ For renting purposes People /i; ">%;,• want to live .jn " workers sottlerunnts. Thev wished to, build SJ; to their own fancies W vl":,-. ;„d s tvle. Regarding the en- £..,..' ',,,4- 0 f elections, the pnly way £, for 'the tenant to let the owner *w. Wtire measures then the ;:;- H ; d go to the Department, SS& could take such, action as was ndvisable. , .;__. Thi Bill was read a second time. 1 li'%onimitS Mr Fraser suggested I

the reinstatement of the.clause lelatinS to "undue hardship" as relating SVfli tenant and owner also the inclusion of "a provision dealing with " - 4 in which people with children may be refused houses .because they U Mr Monteith urged that provision be made to protect a tenant with a sir-11 means and large family by iequiring that an owner who secured eketmlnt of a tenant because he reJS the house for " own use" should To do therein or be proceeded against oy 4e Department. At present people suffering under such conditions frequently found that before they had Ks to take action themselves they, were stopped by effluxion of time The Minister undertook _to consult the leader of the Legislative Counci with a view to devising means to deal with the, difficulties mentioned^ The Bill was repoijed without amendment, read a third time, ana P lnlpreet Supply . Bill No, -2 for 4?9 164 623, was introduced by the Governor-General's message. The Bill was read a second time on put through committee without amendment, read a third time, "Tunnies Act Amendment Bill was rwMved from the Legislative Council, aivl read a first time. . ~ The Prime Minister, replying to Ml Wilford, said the measure would be in clarre of the Minister of Customs (Mr W D Stewart), but whether it would , V ft Government Bill or not would be decided at next Cabinet meeting. The House rose at 8.40 p.m. till 2.30 p.m. on Tuesday.