The Dominion. WEDNESDAY, JULY 27, 1910. NO-CONFIDENCE MOTION.

Dominion, Volume 3, Issue 879, 27 July 1910, Page 4

The Dominion. WEDNESDAY, JULY 27, 1910. NO-CONFIDENCE MOTION.

So far as we remember, the Ward Administration is now taced with its first formal motion of want of confidence. 'There have' been skirmishes in plenty, and the Opposition has expressed its lack of confidence in the Government freely and often, but we cannot at the moment recall any previous occasion on which the Ward Government has treated the matter in a formal fashion. There was ono stage in the career of tho lato Mb. Seddon when wanfc-of-confidence motions were of almost weekly occurrence. Whenever an awkward question was' raised by the Opposition, or an embarrassing amendment moved, Me. Seddon found the simplest means of whipping his following 1 into line was to declare tho action of his opponents one of "want of confidence." It was an effectual means in those days of disposing of awkward issues. We doubt very much if the same conditions exist to-day. Sir Joseph Ward has not the ,samo control of his 'following as was-possessed by his predecessor, and the country is not so well satisfied with the party in power, and in consequence not so easily fooled. The actions of members aro being closely watched by their constituents, and the country members especially will require to ,act with circumspection on any question affecting the future land policy of the Dominion.

' 'Turqing to the motion moved by the Leader of the Eeform party as an amendment to the formal proposal to go into Committee of Sup-' ply, it is not surprising that he should have chosen the land question as his means of attack. Im-port-ant as the question of land settlement is, we are not at all certain that its influence on the present'and future prosperity of the country is fully appreciated by the bulk of the public. In the country the necessity for providing facilities for settlement, and for makingthe conditions of settlement attractive, is clearly understood. But the townspeople do not realise the difficulties which confront the would-be settler and the discouragements which too often follow in his footsteps. The long-spun-out delays which dishearten the new-

comer to the country are equally affecting the farmers' sons who desire to,secure holdings of their own, and the farm labourers and others who, have managed to save enough to enable them to start farming on their own account. For every section o:f Crown laud which comes into the market there are probably a score of applicants, and as only one of the'number can be successful in each case, the remainder. simply waste their time and money in applying and hanging about waiting for tin! ballot. The demand for land is undoubted even under existing conditions. How much greater it .would, be, and how much more rapidly the development of the Dominion would proceed, with more attractive, conditions of settlement and a more' whole-hearted effort to bring the available land into the market, and so into occupation, can be easily understood.

The amendment moved by . Mr. Masses deals with various aspocts.of the question of land settlement, each of wuich is- of much importance. The demand for the option of the freehold is naturally a prominent feature; and we are pleased to see in this, respect that the Leader of tile itol'ovcn party has taken care to Ida ye no. room lor doubt as to the policy of his party in the matter of the reaggregation of large estates. On occasions in the past attempts have been made to saddle the Opposition with the desire to provide a means for the aggregation of large estates; or at least a sympathy with those who wish to move in that direction. The. definite > pronouncement in Mr. Massey's amendment in favour of tho limitation of the ai'ea of freeholds acquired under his proposal removes the possibility of further misrepresentation on this point. The policy in regard to the granting of the,freehold to holders of leases-in-perpetuity, and the. utilising of the cash so obtained in the purchase of further lands for settlement, will commend itself to those who realise what a bad bargain to the State the 939 years' lease really island the more speedy opening up of surplus Native lands for settlement purposes must find-approval with all. The fact that the Prime Minister has treatsd; the amendment as a-motion Of want of confidence can only be taken to mean that the proposals embodied, are antagonistic to the policy of the Government. How far. so it/is impossible at present to say, for Sir Joseph Ward's, speech last evening'threw' very little light on the He quoted a great many figures in an effort to show thatsettlement is proceeding apace under his administration, but on questions of general policy he said very little. It was somewhat curious to hear him condemning the attitude of the owners of large estates in demanding the highest price possible for land taken from them under the Lands 'for Settlement Act, and complaining of the high land values thus created, when the whole policy of his Government has in the direction ofraising land' values to the highest possible limit. • He, however, was not at his best last evening. Though filling ithe .office, of Minister for Lands, the land question is not a strong subject with him. His colleague tho Minister for Agriculture would probably have been more at home. The debate will probably extend over several days, and will afford '.some insight into the minds of members on the various important issues raised. The amendment may be taken'as evidence that the Bcform party is determined to force' the Government to come out into the open on the land question, and to insist on an active and progressive policv of 'land settlement as the soundest foundation upoii which the prosperity of the country can be established.