NOT CONFISCATION

Evening Post, Volume CVIII, Issue 108, 2 November 1929, Page 19

NOT CONFISCATION

NATIVE TRUSTEE BILL

REPLY TO MR. H. D. BENNETT

The provisions of the Native Trustee Amendment Bill which were the subject of objection by Mr. H. D. Bennett in an interview published in yesterday's "Post" were referred to by the Minister of Native Affairs (the Hon. Sir Apirana Ngata) when the Bill was under second reading discussion in the House of representatives yesterday. Sir Apirana challenged the suggestion that the Bill was nothing short of confiscation, as stated by Mr. Bennett. It waa far from the purpose of tho Native Trust Office, said the Minister, to be harsh in the matter of payment, of rates. It was as well for the House to understand that there were a number of reserves in various parts of the two Islands vested in the Native Trustee. Amonst these were reserves amounting to about 160 acres in the Motueka district.' At present they were leased from year to year, but that kind of tenure had been found very unsatisfactory, and the purpose of the Bill was to permit of improved conditions in respect to the leases. The member for Southern Maori and the member for 'Motueka had interviewed him, and he had given an undertaking that, in regard to the areas required for occupation by those' of tfie beneficiaries who were anxious to farm their lands, he would make it his personal business with the Native Trust Office to see that they received a fair deal. Far from being'confiscatory, the Bill was intended to help the beneficiaries. Behind the complaint made by Mr. Benntt, said Sir Apirana, was a demand that the Native Trustee should be divested of the trust and returned to the beneficiaries. He said he did not believe in keeping the trust going longer than was necessary, and that if there were any large beneficiaries they 6hould be divested from the trust.