TAIERI FARMERS

Evening Star, Issue 21354, 7 March 1933, Page 1

TAIERI FARMERS

THE RIVER IMPROVEMENTS BILL FURTHER CONCESSIONS [From Our Pj-kluuixtiet Reporter.] WELLINGTON, March. 6. Further to ease the financial obligations of Taieri River drainage area ratepayers, a number of amendments to the Taieri River Improvement Bill were introduced by Governor’s Message in the House to-day, 'lt was originally proposed that the trust be able to impose a rate for the year ending March 31, 1933, to commence repayment of the £76,000 due to the Crown, with current interest, but it was now intended l to add this year’s interest (£3,800) to the principal, making the loan £79,800. The trust will not have to inake any payment till March 31, 1934. The new schedule of repayments shows that thirty-six and a-half years are allowed, the interest charged being 5 per cent. Provision is also made that interest is payable on any instalmentbecoming overdue. The new schedule of rating provides that the maximum rates be 4s 6d, (5s 6d, and 8s 6d per acre for the years ending March 31, 1934,-. 1935, and 1936 respectively, those dates being a , year later tlvan those originally fixed. In two years’ time,the trust is to review all rates over 8s 6d an acre, and, with the -approval'of the Minister of Works, , may amend the rating classification where it considers it equitable to do so. A new clause provides that any person may appeal against rating classification on the ground that the works upon which such classification was based have not. been substantially carried out, and therefore the classification does not now fairly classify the land of, the appellant, but an appeal shall not he on any other grounds whatsoever; and for the purpose of any. such appeal, the expiration of the time appointed for inspection of the classification lists shall be deemed to be the date of the passing of this Act. A hardship clause is to _be inserted empowering the trust, with the approval of the Minister of Finance, if it thinks fit, to remit payment of the repayment rates payable, either wholly or in part, or to postpone the payment thereof for such time as it thinks fit in any case where, after full inquiry, it is satisfied that enforcement of payment would cause hardship to the person liable. When the amendments were introduced, Mr Jones (Dunedin South) stated that he had pointed out when the Bill first appeared that the Taieri farmers could not meet the position, and since 1929 no rates had been paid. Ho understood the amendments would include a hardship clause, for he certainly thought the farmers could not meet the rates involved. There was necessity for an adjustment between the farmers and their mortgagees, and the stock and station agents; otherwise-he failed to see how the Government could get revenue from the area concerned. The works undertaken were very valuable, and he would like to know whether the mortgagees were meeting the difficult position of the Taieri farmers. The Minister of Finance: What has that got to do with this Bill? Mr Jones:. “Does it not mean that the Government wants the £76,000 spread over a certain number of years, and if a mortgagee is demanding the full amount of liis interest, surely some adjustment is wanted.” _ He suggested some inquiry to ascertain if the,mortgagees were meeting the position. There was also some dissatisfaction with the lands classification, which also needed investigation. Mr Ansell (Chalmers) thanked the Minister of Finance for the attention he had given to the difficulties of the Taieri farmers. Since the legislation was introduced a deputation from the district had fully discussed the matter with Mr Coates, who agreed that cases of hardship wpuld bo considered from a practical viewpoint. It was, ho thought, quite apparent that the Finance Minister had accepted the position that the fanners could not shoulder the added liability thrown on them by the original Bill. Personally, he was satisfied that the arrangements made with the approval of the trust, and representative farmers, would be of decided benefit to the farmers of the district._ On the question of lands classification, the Minister _had agreed that, under certain conditions, this could be reviewed so far as those subjected to a high rate wore' concerned. Application for reconsideration would have to be made early from those whose land did not receive the benefit of the works done by the trust. The Minister recognised the ratepayers’ difficulties, and was prepared to meet them at every point. Mr Coates (Minister of Finance) assured the House that the problem of how ilio Government was to collect equitably from the various areas and occupiers the amount due had given Ministers and the Works Department a lot of thought, for some years. The valuation from the departmental viewpoint was correct, but they could not

' get the legislation through Parliament.' | Finally, the Taieri fanners made an i offer, and a” commission was appointed, to review their position. Its recommendations were incorporated in tho original Bill before the House. This measure went to the Legislative Council, and meantime the ratepayers, when informed of its pointed out to the Government that their conditions had become increasingly difficult, and they would be unable to meet their obligations under it. The Government had approached the matter reasonably, and if it found that it was still impo'si sible to pay. then the Crown had power; j to deal with the problem. •