THE BUDGET DEBATE.

Bush Advocate, Volume XIX, Issue 777, 26 July 1907, Page 6

THE BUDGET DEBATE.

THK MIN'ISTKK OF LANDS' SPKF.C'M. Tito Urn. ?»!r 3k--\ali (who iollow- '.•<} tho lender of the Opposition), dealt at length witii the land proposals of the Government. After dealing at j length with alleged .inisreprcsontn- • tions of the Government's actions by the leader of the Opposition, he said, speaking particularly on the land question, that tho Government were represented as desirous of nationalising the land. They never proposed any such thing. i -Mr \lassey. "What about the endowments '? -Mr AlcNab: We brought forward proposals last year, but one of the things pointed out was if we endeavored to got land for settlement in this colony by that Act (Lands for .Settlement) we wore drifting into a very peculiar position. Under that Act all laud purchased lias to be disposed of under leasehold tenure. We had expended about £4.000.000, and since last year the amount had swelled to the appalling sum rf over £.5,000,000 — all expended in the purchase of private estates. Our first proposal to the people — and it is continued in the present Land Bill — was to end that condition of matters and no longer go into the open market to get all the land for settlement by taking tlie land away from present holders, terminating the freehold tenure and disposing of it by leasehold. We brought down proposals to compel large land owners to supply a large portion of the demand, and that was to swell the amount of land to be disposed of, not on leasehold, but on freehold tenure . -Mr -VloNab continued thai this j struck members on the Opposition j | Mel'? with full force. But large num--1 hers of thorn won: sympathetic at j heart with those who owned those v.-'.st estates. (Interruption). But when the Government proposed a measure !.o reduce an estate of £270,---000 unimproved value by £220,000, Opposition members all over the colony echoed tho voice of protest of | tho largo landowners. What did Mr Janus Allan say? Ho complained that the land was going to be put on the market, but the market was being cut away from tlie owner by limiting tho buyers in excluding the owner of £1.5,000 worth of land. The leading members of tho Farmers' I'iiion as well as members of the Opposition took up that position. Not long ago at Levin the opinion ■ was expressed thot these large esI tates wore not advantageous to tho people — (hoar, hear) — and this opinion was pretty unanimous too from Now Plymouth to Napior. Tho sooner | the question was faced in a practical manner the bettor. li wiis also said that the Government had thrown up tho sponge because they wore now offering the freehold to tenants under the L.I.P. —that they had abandoned their position. What was the Government's '• position in the first Bill brought j downy In the Bill as it loft tho Lands Commit 100 least year it was contemplated that the freehold should I l)o given to everyone of them who j | wanted it. The only difference be- j twoen that scheme and the present ! one was that under the system as j originally proposed the freehold I should he put up and every person I should have an opportunity of getting j it. ! I'mh-v ti-.o present Hill, in ph-.eo | ■ ( if i!>e open iiiiirket :•. n.'l every man ; i ' I

h;'Yi:;g ;< chuiKV. ii was lin•i ir■ r 1 In t lit' iu.ju in cfciii). I i ion. Mr WiHoif!: i'li'ii'i :i i i.-ii i;' i. ion ;■- --'Mr MeN;,!,: I ,i:)rv sirl.-li r:ilf":i;t. -Mr Misery: I'nv.'Mi v; : ;i;c:T\lr .McN'ii'i: Yos. ;).;•<■.-'•:. I Viiiu-.-. y\ v }!;;■;•■;••■/ : (';;:; I'-r-a I ion ? Mr _\!rN;<l): r .iins is ; he- soinr.rsanW til {»('Vf!"!!l!MMl! MnV<- "illl'Mci !!! <-!ii\iifcii;)!) \\ i l i ! l.i.j;. iiC/U!c:.s. lie c ji!tinuod tlial in tlu> origiiial l>iil ji .-= iirsr prosi'iitc^ there was no UiOiitioii n>iule of tho iignre .'.t wliiili tin- l'r»'Oliold was to be granted. li was left to public coni])etitioii. Me liad jio doubt hiiiiseii' th.i.t tlierc wouid li;u<' been an outcry regarding tlie r.roposal to tender lor tlie fivohdld against ilic man iv occu])ation as jirovidod by a clause contained when the Bill left the committee. jlsid the clause been allowed to go on as originally brought down the firrhold of those l.i.p. loasos would luivo lieen given wry little in excess of tho original value, or what was known as tho "original value. 1 ' It had to bo remembered that large numbers of the lease-in-porpotiiity holders when they took up their holdings had hadthe option of taking thorn on the cash system, tho o.r.p. system, or the l.i.p. system, and they voluntarily choose tho last-named. I Last year the Government proi posed after tho lapso of ton years, to compel owners to dispose of all lands hold by them in excess of i'oO.OOO value. X'ndor the proposals submitted to the House a few days ago it was proposed to tax heavily by the graduated .system. Ho did not think members realised what a heavy tax the Government intended to impose.

Proceeding, the Minister said it' was held by a ji/ivat number of menih. ■!.-. that tli" '!;;x commenced too hisJi, but in- would point out that never before had they on the statute book provisions for absolutely preventing •.■•.•asion of the tnx. ?•'■) illustrate what he meant he referred to a case which has been much quotd of late. That of selling, say. 10,000 ;:ctes accepting £o by way of payment, and by a circuitous process becoming the owner again. In this ingenious way payment of the graduated tax was evaded. He explained how the values of estates — to be i a ken under the Lands for Settlement Act — would be assessed in the future (on the lines already fully indicated in the Bill.) Few members realised what the actual effect of the Government proposals would be. The very working of the law would be a material factor in the settlement of the lauds of the country. Coming to the Land for Settlement Act, he said it was now proposed to let thf-sc 1 lands on a shorter lease than had beer, the case before. The working of the Act had resulted in what was really a great profit to the colcny. Under the new proposals tenants would be given a thirty-three years' lease, with perpetual right of renewal and security for improvements. Under the new proposals he believed the Government would Lt> unable to deal with a large number of estates of which the Government was unable to obtain possession at the present time. He outlined the ballot proposals and other features of the Bill, and then passed on to endowments. Last year the option was taken away from all the lands proposed to be set apart as endowments, as the Bill came back from committee; The area in question was about 16,800,---000 acres — now the Government proposed to set aside 9,000,000 acres. The reason tliat the greater portion of this area was to be found in the South. Island was simply this — that the greater portion of the Crown lands of the colony w-as situated in the South Island. As the Land Bill came from committee last year it was proposed to give the freehold in respect of native lands. Mr Massey : And you opposed it ? Mr McNab retorted that it was in the Bill as he moved the second reading. The portion of Crown lands not required for the endowments would be treated just as Crown lands wore treated at the present time. The bulk would no doubt be let under grazing and perpetual leases. When the hind, in the opinion of the Land Boards, wa.s suitable for close settlement, the optional tenure would come in. the lease-in-perpetuit"y being replaced by tho GG years' renewable lease. DEMAND FOR THE FRKEHOLi). As the Oppositio.n demand for the granting of the freehold of Land for Settlements land, the position of the Government was clear. The very fact that borrowed money had been used to buy that land showed that as far as it was concerned tho freehold had been a failure. The duty oi' the Government was to see that while it controlled land so bought. the len.'chol'l tenure was retained and ihe freehold vested in the State.