PARLIAMENT IN SESSION

Dominion, Volume 21, Issue 240, 11 July 1928, Page 12

PARLIAMENT IN SESSION

NO-CONFIDENCE DEBATE LAND SETTLEMENT POLICY MINISTER ON INTENSIVE USE Land settlement was the main theme of the seven speakers who participated in the Address-in-Keply no-confldence debate in the House of Representatives yesterday. The debate was resumed by Mr. E. A. Ransom (Pahiatua), who said that the ■ present unemployment situation had been brought about through want of outlook on the part of the Government, it had not taken the steps it should have taken to meet the position. A member: What sort of steps. Eactors which had contributed towards ' unemployment more than anything else, said Mr. Ransom, were the immigration policy of the Government and the land settlement policy. Under the present administration farming was not sullied ent- . ly attractive to induce settiers to stay on the land. The Government was settling men on the wrong class of land. Referring to the purchase of the Te Wera - block of land, Mr. Ransom said he had no doubt that the Minister of Lands thought he was doing the right thing. A member: Do you suggest there is anything wrong with it? Mr. Ransom: Unfortunately the Minister did not inspect the land before he purchased it. The purchase of that laud was nothing more or less than a colossal / blunder. A member: Why do you say that? “Do you think I would make a statement like that without having a very good reason for doing so?” replied Mr. Ransom. Mr. W. D. Lysnar (Gisborne) : We would like to hear it. “Te Wera does not lend itself to any great improvement,” said Mr. Ransom. Mr. Lysnar: You are quite wrong. Mr. Ransom: “It is comparatively new country, and is not likely to be improved during the next few years unless it lends itself to top-dressing.” Proceeding, Mr. Ransom vigorously criticised the taxation policy of the Government, declaring that where it touched the pocketsof the wealthy there had been a decrease, and in the case of those less well off an • enormous increase. Demand for Land. The Millister of Agriculture (Hon. O. J. Hawken) said it seemed that Mr. Ransom had mixed up the questions of land settlement extension and intensive cultivation. Was it suggested that highclass lands should have been bought during recent years? Surely no one would contend that. Mr. Ransom’s attitude , regarding the Te Wera purchase convinced him that the member for Pahiatua did not believe in the Government buying any of the big holdings which consisted mainly of sheep country. Bringing in the unoccupied lands was by no : means an easy matter. Not many of them could be brought in under between £7 to £l2 an acre, and that was a fairly substantial amount for the Govern- • ment to find. He was not arguing that the area should not be broken in. There • was plenty of demand for land by those who did not possess it, who had, no money, and who wanted to borroy everything. “It is folly for a man without money and experience to take up unoccupied land,” declared the Minister. > Mr. W. E. Parry (Auckland Central) : Have the immigrants got money?

The Minister: Some of them have money, I understand. I should say that 90 per cent, of the applications received for land come from people who haven't a penny. , Those experienced in land settlement know that in the interests of the people themselves such people should not be allowed to take up land. A good deal of money is required. I understand it takes at least three years before any production can come from pumice lands.” Intensive Use.

Proceeding, the Alinister said the stated policy of the Government was to keep on the land the settlers who were there. Those engaged in the primary industries had been assisted in numerous directions* by the Government, and the object of it was to encourage increased production by the adoption of the best methods and the intensive utilisation by the farmer of his land. Wherever help was given, the Government insisted that the industry concerned take steps to improve its knowledge with a viev to increasing production. He maintained that if the New Zealand wheat farmer could reach a similar standard of production as that of the Danes it was quite possible he would want no protection at all. Opportunities For Boys.

Mr. D. G. Sullivan (Avon) said it was quite clear that the Government bad abandoned its policy of closer settlement; it was content merely to increase the productivity of the land already occupied. The Minister of Agriculture: Mfhere did you get that from 2 . Mr. Sullivan: The position is perfectly clear. The Government has abandoned its policy of closer, settlement. The Minister of Lands regards his position ns being simply to keep the people on the land'who are already there. Where are the boys and girls who are leaving school to-day going to get their opportunity? In face of wide-spread unemployment, we have the Government intimating to (lie House and to the country that they have definitely thrown off their policy of closer settlement. . . . ,„ . , “That is not correct,” interjected the Minister of Agriculture. Mr. .Sullivan: “(f the English language means anything at all. the speech of Rin Minister of Lands is capable of only one interpretation. The position is quite clear With such a dismal, pessimistic Government in office, it is dangerous to the welfare of the country, [hey have .no policy: they are bankrupt of ideas. . , Mr. Sullivan dealt nt length with the housing problem, mid stated Unit the Government should recognise its rc-

NO-CONFIDENT DEBATE AN UNEMPLOYMENT PREDICTION MORE PARTY AMENmas % The no-confidence debate on the Address-in-Rep!y motion was continued in the House of Representatives yesterday, when seven more members availed themselves of their right to speak for an hour each on various topics. A feature of the debate was the speech of the Minister of Agriculture (Hon. 0. J. Hawken), who, besides dealing with farmers’ problems, predicted that if the people adhei ed to their present policy of keeping their expenditure below income unemployment would be a negligible quantity within twelve months. The House encouraged Mr. E. A. Ransom, the member for Pahiatua, in his references to the United Party. In the evening Mr. W. Di Lysnar (Gisborne) amused the members by his references to his political independence. The division on the amendment will not be taken before Friday night. The House rose at 12.23 a.m.

sponsibilitics and provide sufficient homes to enable the people to live decently, and according to the recognised standard of health. “A Good Asset.” ■ Mr. W. D. Lysnar (Gisborne),dealing with the purchase of the Te Wera block of land, defended the action of the Government, and stated that if that land would not sell no . other land in New Zealand would sell. It ..■as'u good asset, and had demonstrated the necessity for pulling together. He was not satisfied with the work the Government had done, but there was no other party in sight to which he was prepared to attach himself. He had hopes that Mr. Coates would make a good I’rime Minister—(laughter)—but the trouble was that some members outside his party were pulling him in the wrong direction. (Laughter.) “I recognise,” said Mr. Lys-nar,-"that the tide is turn!' There is no reason for us to get our tails down A voice: Speak for yourself. (Laugh.•teri) • . Mr. Lysnar: “Things are coming right; there is no doubt about that.” lie went on to criticise severely the Rural Intermediate Credit' legislation and aspects of the finance policy of the Government. Something should be done in connection with taxation; it was not the desire of the great majority of the farmers to be exempt from the income tax. He an alteration in the constitution of the Meat Board, advocating that it should be divided into districts with each district, electing its representative. Oil er Speakers. ' i "Keep the people on the land, keep them in the country ami away from towns —the townk can look after themselves,” was the advocacy of Mr. .1. Horn (Wakatipu). The member expressed hiniselef also as being opposed to the land 1 tax; income tax, he contended, .was a fair tax. Mr. J. S. Dickson (Parnell) : Do you °lieve in land tax on city properties? Mr. Horn: That is'' probably a different matter. • • Mr. T. W. Rhodes (Thames) appealed to the Government to augument the founds of the .State Advances Department. The humanitarian legislation passed by the Reform Government was eulogised also by Mr. Rhodes. Special reference was / made to the increase in the old-age pensions front 10s. a week to 17s. (id., and the elimination of the restriction regarding the value of the pensioner’s house and furniture, the provision of the miners’ pythisis pensions, 'and the granting of the family allowance. Mr. Rhodes said he regretted the miners’ pension .was the only industrial*pension, and he would like to see this beneficial legislation extended to deserving men in other industries. The increased benefits under- the Workers' Compensation Act was another item of credit among many for the Reform Party. , , . “Cushy jobs” was the description applied by Mr. Rhodes to the relief works provided by the Government. It was easy, he considered, for men to earn more than the rates paid. The roading policy of the Government was to be commended, and that had done much to better the lot of the settlers. The Government bad done a great deal to assist the worker. Criticism of the Government contententions that there was a big advantage to the Dominion in paying off the dead weight war debt in preference to other liabilities of the State, was made by Air. M. J. Savage (Auckland West). He quoted Professor Murphy in support ot bis submissions, arguing that nil debts were the same, and their effect on-the community the same. The Prime Minister: No. no. Mr. Savage suggested that the Government had been guilty of blunders from Arapuni to Otago. . . The Prime Minister: Arapuni is all right. ' , Mr. Savage developed his criticism, alleging that the Government had increased the national debt without maintain a sound financial policy. Further references to figures used by Professor. Murphy and his submissions therein provoked Ministerial laughter, but Mr. Savage contended that in spite of Ministerial assurances that everything was all right, detailed analysis of the financial statistics shown -that, the position was not so good. He traced financial movements since the election of 1925 in an endeavour to show that the Government’s policy had materinly assisted in swelling the deposits in the private banks. The Postmaster-General: What about all the money that has come into the country? Mr. Savage: The money went where one expected it to go, to the institutions where it would bear a higher rate of interest, and be available to the depositors at call. That money came from the Post Office Savings Bank, and it is now being loaned back to lite people for rural credits at 1| per cent, more flinn would need to have been paid had it not been diverted from the Post Office by the Government’s action in reducing the deposit limit, • ■ The adjournment of the debate was moved bv Mr. A. Harris (Waitemata l, and the House rose at 12.23 a.m.

FIGURES AND FARMING A LITTLE MIXED One amusing incident broke the rather deadly proceedings in the House yesterday. In fact, Mr. Hansom got stumped. He bad set the House another of these interminable miillieiniificnl problems that have been so prevalent since the session commenced. This limo members wore asked togisubtract ss. lid. from 255. ltd. This represented file value of a sheep a year, and comes, if worked out carefully, v to fl. Then, somehow Mr. Hansom got' a bit, mixed. This sutu of money covered nearly everything connected witli a sheep; it included shearing, it included feed, bulls, and many oilier incidentals. Members felt there was something wrong in spite of the nmtheimitics. Their thoughts were interpreted by Hi" I’osl-iimsler-Geiieriil when he asked Mr. Hu:isom. "Why mix the bulls with the sheep." a problem that hud no solution.