NATIVE AFFAIRS

Evening Star, Issue 21723, 18 May 1934, Page 11

NATIVE AFFAIRS

PROGRESS OF THE COMMISSION MOST SCHEMES WOULD SUCCEED WITH PROPER SUPERVISION [Pan United Press Association.] ROTORUA, May 17. A tribute to tho Maoris., as workers on tho land development schemes was paid by Leslie Harold Brown, farm supervisor, in the course of his evidence before the Native Commission this morning. Mr Brown said that tho Maoris generally were very keen ,on their work, and, provided adequate supervision was given, he saw no reason why the great majority of the schemes should not be a success. No doubt mistakes had been made, and there would have to be a writing off on some properties, but the Maoris would work well if they were shown the way. He considered that they required more supervision than the pakehn, but there were as many; tired pakchas as Maoris. Tho supervision provided at present was not nearly adequate. Witness dealt in detail with the schemes in the Bay of Plenty, of which he is in charge, and in the majority of cases he said that under proper management ample security was provided in the land for the expenditure made. The Ruatoki A block was particularly good, and he considered in a few years would be the best Maori development area in New Zealand. He agreed with tho previous evidence in regard to Horohoro as a poor dairying proposition. It required an expenditure of £1 to £1 10s per acre on the pastures to make them satisfactory. He also considered that too much had been spent on the Ngatiawa block Of 5,313 acres, and that very little of this would be suitable for dairying. It should provide four dairy farms and three sheep farms, hut the remainder was hardly worth developing. Continuing his evidence, Mr Brown expressed the opinion that too much land was brought in at one time, with the result that it could not be adequately supervised. He agreed that the necessity for finding work for tho unemployed had possibly something to do with it. He thought the majority of the schemes under careful management and with adequate supervision would be a success, but was a little doubtful about the pumice lauds. Ho agreed that a head supervisor should be appointed to maintain connection between the head office and tho field staff. W. B. Bradshaw, representing the Opotiki branch of toe Farmers’ Union, criticised the methods employed in regard to some of the schemes. Ono large area had been burned out because the supervisor had no time to make firebreaks. The area was put down in grass a fortnight after the fire, but had to be resown again because the take was a failure. Jn his opinion this land should never have been taken. The Natives now owned large portions of road frontages, and it was particularly difficult to obtain rates.

Hchry Te Kci Vercoe,' representing a .sub-tribe of the Arawas on the llotoiti, Taheke, and Paehinahina blocks, placed his views on development broadly bofore the commission. Ho did not condemn the schemes, but made a plea for an improved system and a better understanding lie tween those in control and those mi the land. He fully appreciated the work of Sir Apiraua Ngatn. who Was doing a great deal for the Native race; but he pointed out that the owners of laud had very little voice in matters and were hardly consulted. He also opposed the introduction of outside tribes on the Arawa lands. He considered the Arawa trust boards were not functioning in the interests of the whole of the Arawa people. Certain sections benefited more than others from the board’s revenue, principally the Ngati, Whakane, and Tuhonrangi sub-tribes. He also asked for an investigation into the East Coast Native Soldiers’ Fund. He had been trying unsuccessfully for years to get a statement.

Wiremu Karamana made a series of complaints against the Arawa Trhst Board, and also asked that the position of the Native Soldiers’ Fund be investigated. He submitted a lengthy •statement regarding tho Arawa Trust Board, embodying features of the petition sent to Parliament.