IMPORTANT LAND BILL.

Auckland Star, Volume XLI, Issue 243, 13 October 1910, Page 7

IMPORTANT LAND BILL.

WELCOMED BTT ITS OBSTRUCTIVE FRIENBS. THE BILL PASSED. (By Telegraph.—Parliamentary Reporter.) WTir,T,T\TtTf>\ Wednesday. Amendments made in Committee to the Land Settlement Finance Amendment Bill were agreed to by the House last night. Upon the third reading, Mr. W. Fraser expressed the opinion that the Act had been considerably improved by the bill. He felt sure it would become the means of a lot of settlement when people desiring properties of moderate size became aware of the provisions of the law. The objections existing last year had >been removed. Mr. Outhrie (another Opposition member) expressed his approval of the measure, which was, he said, one of the most important land bills they had passed. He thought the principle might well have been extended to native lands, as suggested by Mr. Vernon Reed. Mr. Buxton joined in the congratulations to the Government. He hoped ■the bill would be retrospective. Mr. Forbes remarked upon the action of the Opposition (who now professed to be friendly to the bill) in endeavouring to kill the bill over an all-night sitting. The remarks brought a batch of Opposition members to their feet. Messrs. Guthrie and Anderson explained that they had not attempted to kill the bill, but had merely protested against the ! taking up of such an important bill at a late hour. Mr. Buchanan declared that every amendment effected in the bill had been moved by the Opposition last year. After other speakers, Mr. Laurenson proceeded to criticise the members opposite, and quoted the extreme radical creed of the member for Mataura (now an exponent of the freehold) of twenty years ago. j\lx. Rhodes argued that the Opposition ; had not stone-walled the bill. ; The Hon. J. A. Millar pointed out that from 3 o'clock that afternoon till 1.30 o'clock next morning was occupied by the Opposition on the third reading of two bills. At 1.30 a.m. the Opposition had. deliberately stated that if the bill was proceeded with, no progress would be made before breakfast, and the proof was the bill went through ■ under an hour after a breakfast adjourni ment. ! Mr. Massey joined in the discussion to assert that tho House was quite justified in the action it had taken over the bill. The two measures discussed that evening were the Defence and Education bills. . On every occasion when the process of legislation by exhaustion was indulged in, members on his side of the House , woa'ld take their own way of protesting. The Prime Minister said if they wanted an example of waste of time they had i only to take the proceedings of that evening. Led by the Opposition, they had had a lengthy speech upon the third reading of a bill on which the 18 Opposition members had spoken 99 times. All thes« remarks about the number of speeches and columns of "'Hansard' , occupied by members were exceedingly childish. Sir Joseph went on to decry the recent stonewall as the silliest of opposition he had seen in Parliament, nor was there much sense as a general rule in Tie-handling the whole tiling upon a third reading. He believed that , they could adopt a sensible course in the carrying on of the business of the House, hut if the attempt to work shbrt hours was baulked by the Opposition by ! permitting only an unreasona-bly small amount of work to be done, it did not matter to them if they were to stay there another nronth. If he thought an . unreasonable amount of work was done he would ask the House to go on, and if members wanted to sit 24 hours they would do it. Continuing, Sir Joseph emphasised the valuable feature of the bill, and in this connection he pointed out that members had endeavoured to widen ■ the operations of the measure to a ' greater extent than they ought to go, as it would involve a heavier liability than they should undertake. ; The third reading was agreed to on the voices.