LAND POLICY OF GOVERNMENT

Press, Volume LXXXIV, Issue 25637, 28 October 1948, Page 6

LAND POLICY OF GOVERNMENT

PARLIAMENT

ATTACK BY MR W. A. BODKIN (P.A.) WELLINGTON. October 27. Under three bills dealing with land introduced by the Government this session the freehold as it had been known for generations would disappear, said Mr W. A. Bodkin (Opposition, Central Otago) speaking to the I second reading of the Servicemen’s Settlement and Land Sales Amendment Bill in the House of Representatives this evening. The other bills to which he referred were the Land Bill and the Land Valuation Court Bill. Replying to the date, the Minister of Lands (Mr C. F. Skinner) said the old bogy that the Government would nationalise land had been effectively exploded by the bills before the House. The increase in the numbers of people owning their own land %a>d their own houses since the Government took office was an effective answer to that. The bill was read a second time and referred to the Lands Committee. Mr Bodkin said Crown tenants should not delude themselves that they could now exchange their leases for a real freehold. It would be the old ‘ usehold.” What would the freehold be worth if its value was to be fixed by a State department under a Socialist regime which would determine in detail the interest of the so-called owner in the land itself and also in the improvements and if another State department would decide to whom the land could be transferred and on what conditions.

The Government’s policy had been cleverly camouflaged, said Mr Bodkin, by the division into several bills, but one section of the community which would understand what was being done would be the Communists. In 1919 the Communists were assembled with other men, some of whom were in the Cabinet to-day, and they.drew up what was known as the policy of “usehold” for land. The Communists reading the three bills introduced this session would say: “The boys of the old brigade are standing 'by us. They are not letting us down, even if we have had to wait all these years for the ‘usehold’ tenure.”

LIFE SENTENCES

COMPARISON OF ACTUAL TERMS SERVED (P.A.) WELLINGTON. October 27. In practically every civilised country where capital punishment had been abolished or where sentences of death were commuted to imprisonment for life, the practice was to review such sentences after a lapse of time to determine whether, having regard to the interests of the community and of the offender, conditional or absolute release might be granted, said the Attor-ney-General (MrH. G. R. Mason) in a written reply to Mr W. A. Sheat (Opposition. Patea) in the House of Representatives to-day In England, between 1920 and 1948. 119 persons out of 194 sentenced to death who had their sentences commuted to imprisonment for life were released after detention for 12 years or less. The average term of imprisonment served by the whole 194 released prisoners was just over 14 years. In Scotland during the same period the average term served was just over 13 years. The i average term served by life-sentence prisoners released in New Zealand was 124 years. Each case was carefully considered according to public interest and the likelihoed of the prisoner again offending. “The decisions are left to the judgment of members of the Prisons Board, in whom I have complete confidence,” said Mr Mason,

USE FOR POTATO SURPLUS SOUGHT

(From Our Parliamentary Reporter.) WELLINGTON, October 27.

“If it is possible for the potatoes to be used as stock food, this will be arranged,” said the Minister of Agriculture (Mr E. L. Cullen) in a written reply in the House of Representatives to-day to a question from Mr E. B. Gordon (Opposition. Rangitikei) about surplus potatoes. The Government’s liability applied only to surplus potatoes, said the Minister, which were potatoes for which a market could not be found in the ordinary course of trade. Supplies to all sections of the community had already been assured and every possibility of export was being examined.

PARLIAMENTARY DAY

(From Our Parliamentary Reporter.) WELLINGTON, October 27. The House of Representatives had an interesting afternoon to-day' qonsidering the replies of Ministers to an accumulation of questions on topics ranging from life sentences for murder to the advertising of films. This evening the House gave a second reading to the Servicemen’s Settlement and Land Sales Amendment Bill and began to debate the second readjng of the Dairy Produce Amendment Bill.