LAND AGENTS.

Evening Post, Volume LXXXII, Issue 47, 24 August 1911, Page 3

LAND AGENTS.

' ' ♦ — «— — ■ SHALL THEY BE LICENSED? LAND VALUES AND MONOPOLIES. BILL READ A SECOND TIME. Ths Bill introduced by Mr. Witty pfbviding for the registration of land agents was debated at considerable lertgth in the House of Representatives last night. In moving its second reading, Mr. Witty said he had received letters from reputable land agents and Magistrates urging him to push on with the measure. An auctioneer had to take out a license, and in the case of land agente there should be provisions for safeguarding the public. Before a license could be granted the applicant would have to lodge a fidelity bo&d for £500 from some approved insurance company. He urged the Minister of Internal Affairs to take the Bill up, and asked him if he would do so. The Hon. D. Buddo: I will speak later on. Mr. Witty eaid that if the Minister refused he would move that the Bill should be referred direct to the Statutes Revision Committee. Mr. Buddo remained immovable* and Mr. Witty contented himself by moving the second reading of the Bill and again expressing tho hope that the Government would do the right thing. SAFEGUARDING THE PUBLIC. Mr. D. H. Guthrie congratulated the member for Riccarton on the step he had taken, It was necessary that something should be done to safeguard the interests of the public. There had been glaring caseß which demonstrated this fact. Still the Bill, in details, was very crude. He was sure that it was not Mr. Witty's intention to kill out the small land agent and give a. monopoly to the large firms. On the other hand ths licensee fee waa too onall— £2 would be no bar. Mr. Witty. That waa * misprint; it should have been. £20. Mr. Guthrie: What do you suggest? Mr. Witty : 1 have that to tha com. mittee. Mr. Guthrie concluded by saying there was urgent need for some mea«uf& such as that before the House, Messrs. Pool©, Okey, and Forbes also supported the- BUI. Mr. if. P, Lake said his surprise was that the Government had not taken up tho que«tion i before. He objected to tho clause providing for the payment of fines and fees to the local Charitable Aid Board as a system which was undesirable. He also thought that the penal clause for wrongful conversion and false accounts should be carefully considered before passing through committee. Mr. E. Newman joined in the chorus of approval, aftd said h© hoped . some check would be pttt upon the exchange of land, a system which had largely grown_ in recent years, and wag a most pernicioue one, because values were boomed up to a fictitious extent. ''There is no provision in the Bill which will guarantee honesty or sound dealing/ said Mr. Stallworthy. In his opinion it would be beter to compel land agente to register (at a purely nominal fee] and to keep a register of all transactions and all property placed in their hands for sale. Mr. G. W. Russell contended that there, were men in the email country districts of New Zealand following occupations other than that of land agent who occasionally acted aa land agents. The Bill would stop this, but it would not make the slightest difference to the big firms. He criticised details of the Bill, and pointed out that there was no provision for estreatmeut of^ a bond where malfeasance has been proved. HON. D. BUDDO'S VIEWS. The Hon. D. Buddo said the Government had the matter under consideration for the last two or three yeara. He agreed that land agents were 'large ly to blame for forcing up land values, but owners helped hy fixing priced above that which they hoped to get. A« to the fee, he did not think that the license fee should be fixed too high. They would not be doing very much service to the community by throwing the t small" men out of business. Tire provision for a fidelity bond was one of the best in the Bill. In, the definition of "land agent" under the Bill its «cope required to be widened. It should be extended to include dealing in house property. Another point which would •7l 1? ?e considered in connection With the Bill was whether a double fmaacial > responsibility should be placed on auctioneers who were land agents. Then there wae the question of a person, interested in a land syndicate acting as a land broker. He did not think, how ever, that the House would listen to the suggestion that there should bo regulation of the exchange of property. Payment in kind could be made jusfc aa well a« payment in cash. H« concluded by saying that the Government had a Bill drawn up, and it was intended to introduce it this session. If the member for Riccarton cared to let the Bill go to Conronttee, he was sure a useful measure would be evolved. If not, the Government was prepared to briag before the House a Land Agente Bill on similar line*, He would support the second reading of the Bill. THE MONOPOLY QUESTION. The Hon. G. Powlds opposed the Bill, although he acknowledged that the mover had remedied some of its worst defect*. His opposition was to the making of v, monopoly of the business m dealing in land, as he had known. Bevefal caees m which men who had been reduced to the last depths of despair through lack of employ metit had been enabled to make a fresh start by in the safe of profwrties, Sach » Bill as this would prevent such, chances being _ afforded. He understood Wie idea, of licensing, but h« objected U> a high licence fee being imposed. He believed that we are all too prorte to Bet up barriers to be got over, and he iT j tJlat *"6" 6 wi( * er op&i they left ths door of opportunity the better it Would be. He did not know that th^re was any necessity for bringing in legieation dealing with this question. He ? x ? ot^fa rd of any particular abuses, bnt he did object to s&tting up a close corporation, which he was perfectly euro would be the nwolt of charging a high license fee. Sevaral other members spoke, and the second reading was agreed to on the voices.