STATE ADVANCES

Evening Post, Volume CX, Issue 47, 23 August 1930, Page 7

STATE ADVANCES

A NORMAL YEAR

DEPARTMENT'S PROBLEMS

yERY FEW FAILURES

T&e activities of the State Advances were the subject, of *».»«ral <*sestions in the House of Becresentatives yesterday, when the estimates of the Department wore under review. Mr. B. A. Wright (Reform, Wellington Suburbs) sought information as to whether very many properties were falling back into the hands of the Gov.eminent. He did not suggest that abandonments were_ the fault of the Government, but" unfortunately too many applicants were called upon atter getting their advances to saddle themselves with ■ a second mortgage, and that was a fatal position. ' Mr W. J. Poison (Independent, Stratford) saia that the serious fluctuations in the valuations made by oflifeers of the Department were having a disheartening effect. It seemed that the valuations varied according to the policy of the Department—whether it was conservative or not—and he hoped that some inquiry should be made into the question. The present policy was getting the Department into difficulties in connection with loans. Mr D. G. Sullivan (Labour, Avon) Asked what amount the Department had in hand, and how far the Department was behind in its loans. He also wished to know if the Government was contemplating obtaining another loan/ to augment the funds of the Department. ' Mr. J. Bitchener (Reform, Waitaki) asked if the Prime Minister would tell the House if there were many empty houses carrying State Advances loans. A number of rumours were going about, and he considered that a definite statement should be made. Mr. M. J. Savage (Labour, Auckland .West) asked why firms of solicitors were 'appointed as agents for the Department. He submitted that it was fair neither to the Department nor to the legal profession generally, because jt gave those solicitors undue preference in doing work for the Department. NORMAL PROFIT. Eeplying on behalf of the Prime Minister, the Minister of Lands (the Hon. E. A. Bansom) said that there was no more than the average number tof properties coming back on to the Department. There were always a few coming back, but the percentage was small indeed. The activities of the Department had increased tremendously during the last two years, and as the repayments came in fresh loans wouia be granted. There was one block of empty houses in Christchurch that was oiving the Government a great deal of thought, but the position was normal elsewhere. ' ' Beplying to Mr. Savage, Mr. Bansom said he understood that by the appointment of a firm of solicitors m the various towns it was arranged that they should do the work on a definite P°<« Wh/sto'uld not the Public Trustee, 'do the work?" asked Mr. Savage. • ' Mr. Eansoni: "That is quite a feasible suggestion, and I am sure the Minister in Charge of the Department will be agreeable to look into it. ' "Mr W E. Barnard (Labour, Napier) feaid that, in justice to the legal profession, he would like to point out that the fees fixed by the Stato Advances Office for solicitors was very small. Wore there not often collateral details, such as the releasing of mortgages, to be carried out, it would not be worth while the Bolicitor taking on the ■work. Often there was a number of extra duties to be carried out, and it was these that sometimes made a clients' bill seem high. COMPETENT OFFICE. Mr. W. Nash (Labour, Hutt) said ■that after several months' experience of the Department, he had come to the conclusion that there was no more competent office from the point of view of money-lending, and no office which worked at such a low cost to the borThe Leader of the Opposition (the Bight Hon. J. G. Coates) referred to a case in which a. stipulation had been made that the advance had to be repaid if the property was sold. The amount of the advance was £3000. He asked ■whether that was a new restriction conforming with a new point in the TJnited Party policy. Such a proposal had been mooted previously, but it hadinot been given effect to, because in the case of an amortised loan the property was the security. Mr. Forbes said he had no knowledge of any such condition being imposed. , . ~ Mr. Nash said there was a definite restriction against the transfer of houses in' his own electorate, 'and he thought it was necessary in order to prevent speculative transfers. It was true in respect to the Hutt Valley Settlement that houses could not be transferred outside of the Department.