FAIR RENTS BILL

Press, Volume LXXII, Issue 21802, 6 June 1936, Page 18

FAIR RENTS BILL

Second Reading Passed ‘ In House

LANDLORDS AND TENANTS

REFERENCE OF DISPUTES TO MAGISTRATES [From Our Parliamentary Reporter.] WELLINGTON, June 5. The unscrupulous tenants and extortionate landlords of the Dominion received verbal castigation in the House of Representatives during the long debate this afternoon and evening on the Government’s Fair Rents Bill. This measure makes comprehensive provision for the restriction of rents, and refers disputes between tenants and landlords to Magistrates’ Courts. The general view voiced by Government speakers to-day was that eventually Labour’s housing development plans would practically obviate the necessity for legislation of this sort. Opposition speakers pleaded for consideration for the landlord who had suffered during the depression, and held that the legislation would discourage housebuilding. The House rose at 10.30 p.m. after the bill had been read a second time. The bill will be discussed again to-morrow morning. “We are not under any illusion that this bill is a permanent solution of the housing problem,” said the AttorneyGeneral (the Hon. H. G. R. Mason) in moving the second reading. “The proper solution is a comprehensive housing scheme which will provide hundreds and thousands of houses and do away with the necessity for restrictive legislation. Such a scheme will shortly be put in operation by the Government, and when more houses are built there will be less need for this legislation.” I “Definite Need for Bill” A bill to regulate rents was not a measure to be introduced unless there was definite need for it, Mr Mason continued. Actually the need at ! present had become so urgent that the Government had been compelled to take action. Immediately tenants had any more money, whether by an increase in wages or even higher sustenance rates, their rents were so raised that they received little or no benefit. In many cases a tenant was actually worse off after the landlord had raided his increased wages. “The House would be astonished at the number of representations made to the Government about rents," Mr Mason said. “There is ample Justification for interference by the Government in the matter, which is becoming daily more serious. We frankly admit that this bill cannot be a permanent solution —the proper solution *is a housing scheme —but in the meantime wo cannot have tenants thrown out of their houses through their inability to pay excessive rents.” Mr Mason said the bill departed somewhat from previous legislation of a similar nature. Increases in rents could only be made by reference to a court, and the full jurisdiction of the Magistrate’s Court was made to apply. Special attention was being paid to the letting of rooms or parts of houses, which could become even more oppressive than the letting of houses at high rentals. The position was that old buildings converted into flats were counted as dwellings and included in the bill. Blocks of flats built as such were excluded, Mr Mason continued. The Government took the view that the erection of new blocks of flats should not be interfered with. Any restriction in this direction would probably accentuate the housing shortage. “The policy of the bill is not to interfere with rents for new houses,” the Attorney-General said. “We do not want to do anything which will discourage building. The bill will also bind the Crown. There is no idea of the Crown or any Government department treating its tenants any worse than the Government would wish private landlords to treat their tenants. I am not going to disguise the difficulties which arise from rentrestriction legislation. We want to protect the tenants who are in the greatest need. Probably they belong to the poorest section of the commuity, and are likely to be thrown out hito the street without a roof over their heads. Accordingly tke bill is designed to prevent ejectments." Rights of Landlords The bill restricted the right of a landlord to distrain. That was a very exceptional power, which dated from the Middle Ages. It had been discarded in England, although it still obtained here. A landlord had a right to enter premises without any court proceedings and seize any chattels and sell the last stick of furniture of a tenant who was in arrears with his rent. The bill provided that a landlord would have to get leave from a magistrate before he could exercise these harsh and oppressive powers. The clause which prevented contracting out of benefits under the bill was necessary to protect certain people in their own interests, and provision that the magistrate’s decision should be f.nal was a recognition of the fact that comparatively few tenants under the biff would be able to meet the cost of appeals. Regulations could' be made under the bill fixing rents on the basis of a percentage of the capital value. That was the basis usually employed in the war legislation. Power was given to institute it in any area where it was found convenient to do so, but the general view was that a magistrate’s decision would be better than

KALINGO IN DOCK fortnight needed to repair DAMAGE [THE PRESS Special Service.] WELLINGTON. June 5. When the Union Company's cargo steamer Kalingo was lifted on the floating dock yesterday, a survey revealed that fairly extensive damage had been done to her hull when she struck the south training wall in the Grey river recently. The ship’s forefront was badly crumpled, a number of plates and frames being bent and twisted. Other damage was done at several parts well down on the starboard side of the hull.

A start was made yesterday with the work of repairing the hull, which is expected to take about a fortnight. Apart from the straightening and fairing up of certain damaged plates and frames, at least five new plates will be required to make good the damage.