The Bay of Plenty Times WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 18, 1943. SOLDIER SETTLEMENT AND LAND VALUES

Bay of Plenty Times, Volume LXXI, Issue 13227, 18 August 1943, Page 2

The Bay of Plenty Times WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 18, 1943. SOLDIER SETTLEMENT AND LAND VALUES

There is a strong conviction, held in many quarters that, aider the war, servicemen'will be desirous of going on the land in large numbers. It is a question whether this view is _ entirely correct, yjost of the servicemen who return to the Dominion fit and vel will naturally go back to the* trades and professions with which they are familiar, and such men are not likely to have any difficulty in doing so. But there is certain to be a small minority who, believing that they would like to become farmers, will seek to go on the land. The Government intends to meet.the wishes of tins minority, and it cannot be criticised for that. But when Lie Government makes this an excuse for interfering with the rights of farmers to sell their land at the market price of the day then the matter takes on a new■ complexion. The fact '‘hat such a contentious measure should be introduced in the House in the closing hours of a moribund Parliament suggests that there is some sinister political motive actuating the Government. This Land Bill has been considered by the Law Society in Wellington, and absolutely condemned. This new measure takes away the inherent right of a farmer to sell his land at a price and on terms the buyer is willing to give. This is the antithesis of the democratic principle. Tne argument for this high-handed procedure is to prevent land speculation. The world cannot get along without speculation, foi all life is just one big gamble. Shut out speculation and private enterprise is scotched. Private enterprise is at all times speculating and taking risks, and on the whole there are comparatively few failures. Of course there is land speculation, and we doubt whether it can be prevented. To put through a speculation in land there must be a buyer and seller. When these two come together we have a right to assume that both know what they want and what they are prepared to pay, and when the deal is closed we are justified in believing that both buyer and seller are satisfied. A\ e cannot see why, in the case of land, the buyer should be specially protected by the State, and the seller harshly treated. The State has been a buyer' of land for a great number of years, not for soldier settlement alone, but for a variety of State requirements. The procedure has been that the Government Lav Purchaser endeavours to come to equitable terms with the seller, and. failing agreement, the matter is referred to arbitration, each side appointing an arbitrator, the two arbitrators appointing a judge. Nothing could be fairer than this. But this is not sufficient for the Government, which desires to control sales of all farm lands. If farmers taka this filching of their freedom lying down they will deserve all that is coming to them. But the legislation is vicious in principle, and could easily be extended to cover suburban cottage properties. The me a suite thus has interest not only for the farmers but also for city and town property holder 0 The measure could very well be held over until next year, and thus time be given for its full consideration. We believe, however that it will be bullocked through Parliament, in order to catch the votes of the servicemen.