No. 10 Building Scheme

Dominion, Volume 26, Issue 219, 12 June 1933, Page 11

No. 10 Building Scheme

Sir, —The new No. 10 scheme for building is undoubtedly a good, useful scheme, ’ and much ahead of tbe previous attempt; it should be the means of putting a lot of useful buildings up and absorbing quite a number of men now unemployed. But is it complete? Should not some provision be made for the eventual refund of the amount of the subsidy on the labour employed? My point is this: If a person builds a house, say, for £650, on to-day’s prices, and one-third of the value of the house is for labour —that would be £220 approximately—- the subsidy of 50 per cent, on £220 would be £llO, thus making the house cost tbe owner £650 less £llO (equals £540). At to-day’s prices, where contracts are cut to the bone to get work, £650 would be a fair price for the house, and in three or four years’ time it is quite likely it could be sold for £SOO or more. Whereas the owner sis assisted to build by the subsidy of £llO. is it fair that in a few years’ time .lie should be allowed to pocket that amount, plus the unearned increment on the property? Would it not be better for the authorities to treat this as a loan free of interest, refundable when the property is sold to advantage, or over a period of years when the property is revenue producing? To get the house or building worth £650 at to-day’s prices with 1/6 of the total on loan free of interest seems reasonable, but is it advisable to make a present to such owner of this amount in addition to the unearned increment on the low prices of to-day? We must remember that the money is raised by taxing the people, including the relief workers, women, and girls, and it seems hardly fair to give it away to those who are fortunate enough to have sufficient funds to build. There may be some difficulty, legally, in fixing the loan or lien for repayment, but such is not insurmountable. I hope some of your readers will express their views on this matter, and would recommend consideration to the members of Cabinet.—l am, etc., EQUITY. Wellington, June 9.