INQUIRY INTO NATIVE AFFAIRS

Dominion, Volume 27, Issue 146, 17 March 1934, Page 6

INQUIRY INTO NATIVE AFFAIRS

Commission’s First Sitting SCOPE OF INVESTIGATIONS OUTLINED Its duty to inquire into and report upon the administration of the Departments of Government concerned with the administration of Native affairs in New Zealand, the Native Affairs Commission held its first sitting yesterday. After the Commission of appointment had been read, the chairman, Mr. Justice Smith, made a statement outlining the Commission’s views upon the taskbefore it. and adjourned until April 10. Associated with Mr. Justice Smith as members of the Commission are Mr. John Alexander, Auckland; Mr. L. W, Nelson, Whangarei; and Mr. D. G. Johnston, Wellington. Mr. R. H. Quilliam, instructed by the Government, appeared to assist the Commission; Mr. G. P. Finlay, for the Native people; Mr. D. G, B. Morison for certain Natives interested in the West Coast Settlement Reserve; Mr. A. B. Buxton for the Ikaroa Native Land Court; and Mr. F. W. Ongley for Patrick Edward Barry, lately in charge of native land development schemes, if he desires to give evidence. Commission’s View of its Work. Remarking that it might assist the work of preparing for the inquiry if he indicated the view that the Commission took of its work in certain respects, Mr. Justice Smith made the following statement:— “(1) The Commission is authorised to inquire into questions of administration. It is not set up to speculate upon questions of policy. It is to inquire into the administration of a policy already laid down but, within those limits, it will inquire into the matters referred to in cl 1 (a) of the Commission, viz., the probability of the Maori people.achieving the results intended by the development schemes and of their being justified by the benefits they confer on the Maori people. “(2) With regard to the land developments schemes, the Commission understands that there are over forty of them. They should be classified and their history stated. In respect of each scheme, the Commission will desire to know what preliminary survey was made (a) as to the nature of the land; and (b) as to the people who were intended to occupy the lands; ,(c) as to the method of financial control proposed; and (d) as to the supervision of the land development scheme. The Commission will also require to know how the development was actually effected with regard to labour and costs. In respect of costs, the Commission will desire to know in detail the cost of clearing either of bush or scrub andthe cost of draining swamp lands; the cost of fencing, of. cultivating, i.e., ploughing and working preparatory to laying down in pasture or growing crops; the cost of labour and manures; the cost of seeds; and the of all purchases of materials and live stock. The Commission will also desire to know the steps taken, stating them in detail, and by whom, to ensure that lands used or to be used for dairying or sheep or cattle farming were suitable for any such purpose. The Commission expects also to have the current costs at the time for comparison with the actual costs incurred, although the Commission recognises that the schemes may not require to be judged merely as commercial schemes. Supervision of Finance. "The Commission will also desire information as to the operation of financial control during the period of development and full details as to the supervision exercised. "The Commission will also desire information as to the result at the present time, viz., as to the area and extent of t.he land developed under each scheme; the total cost thereof; the number of persons actually settled under each scheme and whether as farmers’ labourers, etc.; how the methods of supervision have operated and how the methods of financial control have operated. “With regard to the inquiry into the funds available for Maori people, information should be supplied according to similar logical methods. The Commission desires to know the origin of each fund, its nature and purpose, who has been and is in control of its expenditure; the objects of the expenditure; who has disbursed the moneys and who has received them; and whether there has been any supervision of the expenditure and use of tlie funds. The Commission also desires to know what methods of financial control are in existence, how they have operated and with what results. Suggestions Expected. “The Commissjpn will also expect to receive suggestions for improvements where they can be made. "With regard to the evidence to be given before the Commission, as the inquiry is into the administration of Government departments, we assume that all facts are to be freely available. This inquiry cannot take the form which is usual in an inquiry between private individuals, viz., of an allegation by one side of certain facts against the other, and a reply by the other that no facts have been adduced to prove the case set up. In the present inquiry the Commission expects that all the relevant facts will be freely made available by all the departments concerned. If there should possibly be any obstruction (and the Commission does not wish to indicate that it has any ground for assuming that there will be), the Commission will expect to bg advised of it. “The foregoing statemc:.t is not to be taken as exhaustive of the views of the Commission with regard to the inquiry. It is merely made in the interests of all concerned as a guide to the production of evidence for the assistance of the Commission.” At the conclusion of the statement, Mr. Quilliam rose and said that the fullest information would be available from all the departments concerned. Mr. Justice Smith: That is very satisfactory.

Answering a question by the chairman, Mr. Quilliam said that there was very little possibility of the Commission’s being able to make a useful start with the hearing of evidence until after Easter.

The Commission then adjourned until Tuesday, April 10.