TENANCY BILL PASSED

Press, Volume LXXXVI, Issue 26187, 10 August 1950, Page 6

TENANCY BILL PASSED

Opposition Presses Many Divisions HOUSE RISES AT 10.17 A.M. ‘ (New Zealand. Press Association) A . WELLINGTON, August 9. At 10.17 a.m. to-day the House of Representatives rose after passing the Tenancy Amendment Bill. The sitting, which had lasted since 2.30 p.m. yesterday with only a tea adjournment, was punctuated by the ringing of division bells on 34 occasions. It was conducted for the most part in good spirit, but after breakfast time-:—there was no breakfast adjournment—discussion became testy, and the end of the debate after nearly 20 sitting hours was welcomed by all. Labour members moved 14 amendments and the closure was applied several times, the Prime Minister (Mr Holland) having taken urgency at the outset of the proceedings yesterday afternoon. The Opposition amendments generally sought to retain for t „ j n , ai }t the measure of protection afforded by the present act, but none or tnese amendments was accepted bv the Government. Mr Holland did, however, undertake that the Government would look further at two of the most keenly-fought clauses to see if something could be done to meet the Opposition’s wishes. Shortly before the House rose for breakfast the Minister of Labour (Mr W. Sullivan), who was in charge of the lill. promised that special legislation would be introduced to protect the interests of members of K Force. Mr C. F. Skinner (Opposition, Buller) had questioned the wisdom of removing the existing protection for former servicemen in view of the likely rehabilitation needs of former servicemen. Both Mr Sullivan and the AttorneyGeneral (Mr T. C. Webb), who had been his right-hand man through the committee stages, received a round of apnlause before the Chairman of Committees (Mr C. G. Harper) reported the bill. Immediately he had done so, the Leader of the Opposition (Mr Fraser) moved that the bill be recommitted to enable further consideration to be given to Six clauses of the bill which the Opposition had contested most stroflgly. He said he felt the Government was not satisfied with the bill, and the Opposition did not think the matters it contained had been properly settled or appreciated. " Closure Motions Both this motion and a discussion of the third reading initiated by Mr Fraser were curtailed by the application of the closure, and after the third reading had been carried by 44 votes to 32 and the bill passed Mr Fraser said he would raise at an appropriate time the question of whether acceptance or closure motions by the Chairman of Committees and by Mr Speaker had infringed the rights of members. Mr Holland undertook to provide an opportunity for a discussion and a vote on this issue, and the House then adjourned until 7.30 o’c’ock, to-night. The first of the Opposition amendments seeking to retain provisions in the present act protecting tenants against landlords seeking repossession was moved bv Mr A. ‘McLagan (Riccarton) shortly before midnight. The closure was moved by Mr Holland about 12.30 a.m. and was carried by 43 votes to 31. the amendment being lost by 42 votes to 31. Similar amend* ments were then moved in turn by Mr Skinner, Mr M. Monhan (Petone), Mr P. G. ConnoHy (Dunedin Central). Mr A. E. Armstrong (Napier), and Mr H. E. Combs (Onslow). Each time the Opposition insisted on a division, which resulted in a vote of 43 to 31 in the Government’s favour. .Clause 2 was then carried at 140 a.m bv the same margin. Mr T H. McCombs (Lyttelton) moved an amendment to clause 3 which, he s t aid. sought to ensure that a landlord could not get privileged possession nf a nroriertv from a former employee if he intended to let the house merelv as an ordinary landlord. Mr McCombs said that if the’ house was not required for the owner’s own use or for another employee—possession in those circumstances would be only reasonable —then the * landlord should not enjov special privileges. If the Government would undertake to give effect to the idea behind the amendment he would not press it. The Attnrnoy-General said that the clause had alreadv gone a long wav. and unless employers could be assured of exemption from the normal restrictions of the Tenancy Act they simply wouM not build houses for employees. 'Hie Minuter of Labour also said that if ind” c trialists were to be encouraged to build homes for their staff they must have an absolute right over those premises. Mr McLa<»an- For employees, yes. Government’s Promise The amendment was lost on the voices after the Minister of Agriculture (Mr K. J. Holyoake) had given an assurance that the Government would look into the matter, and the clause was passed without a division. On the -next clause, dealing with the rights of patients of mental hospitals to recover possession on their discharge of premises they had formerly occupied. Mr F. Hackett (Grey Lynn) moved an amendment to ensure that in such cases the premises would be occupied by patients themselves. He said that if that was agreed to the Opposition would support the clause. The amendment was lost on the voices, and two clauses were passed in that way, but on clause 6. which provides that restrictions on the recovering of possession shall cease to apply six months after any future transfer of tenancy of an urban -property, there was another protracted discussion. Mr McLagan said that the Government had amended the clause to leave the Court some discretion where a tenant objects to the destruction of his goodwill, but tenants were left in a dangerous position. This was entirely contrary to the Government’s earlier promises.

The Minister Assistant to the Prime Minister (Mr J. R. Marshall) said the bill properly destroyed artificial goodwills but left tenants the right to reasonable goodwills.

The Minister of Health (Mr J. T. Wfitts) said he had known of £2OOO being paid for the goodwill of a small milk bar and £7OOO for the goodwill of a restaurant. There must be a return to sane conditions, and statutes could not go on protecting fools from their own follv indefinitely. Mr R. Semple (Opposition. Miramar) said that Labour had always opposed such goodwills, which represented a rake-off of community-created values, but where a person built up goodwill by his own energies he was entitled to every cooper of it. The Attorney-General said that the Government had promised to remove controls from business goodwills, but a tenant could still go to Court for the award of a reasonable goodwill. Tenants wishing another tenant upon a landlord .could not at the same time exact fictitious goodwills. The closure was applied, and the clause carried. ,

A series of six Opposition amendments seeking to preserve the protection for tenants of business premises was defeated on divisions, the voting being 43 to 31 except in one case when onp Government member was shut out.

There was another protracted discussion on clause 10. which enables aged persons to obtain possession nf their dwellings. Mr McLagan and others urged that something should be. done to provide alternative accommodation for those displaced under this and other clauses of the bill. Mr Holland undertook to look further into points raised in relation to this clause, which, however, still went to a division and was carried