CORRESPONDENCE

Feilding Star, Volume XV, Issue 3890, 3 December 1919, Page 3

CORRESPONDENCE

LABOUR PARTY AND THE LAND

(Tot tho Editor.)

Sir,—Under tho above heading you have published what purports to be a fuller explanation of the Labour Party's land policy than that given by myself at tho Drill Hall on Wednesday night last, according to the letter written by Mr S. Andrew, who has not understood or purposely misquotes mo with reference to compensation to prcsont ownors of land, when surrendering their lauds to tho State. My statement on this question was that the peoplo ol New ..calami, "not tbo New Zealand Labour Party," shall say in effect to the present holdera of land: "Tho unimproved values which have been privately appropriated in the past shall not bo disturbed," but all future values, the result of tho gifts of nature or created by tbo community wo proposo to secure for tho community.

To this end, it is proposed that a national valuation of all privatoly owned lands bo made, such valuation to remain on record as the measuro of the present holders' interest in their lands. The present holders are also to havo tho right to surrender their lands to tho State at said valuation, or continue to work them. But if they desire to part with their lands after tins valuation is taken, they will not bo allowed to sell them oxcept to tho State. Tho carrying into efl'oct of thoso proposals, amongst, other things, would provido a basis of value on which the State, on their surrender, would pay for the personal interests of the present owners at a fair market value, not, as stated by Mr S. Andrew, on payment for improvements only. Improvements effected by present holdors betwoon tho period of valuation and their resumption by the State would in the first place bo paid for in full, and, in tho second place, bo exempt from taxation. It will thus be seen that no expropriation is intended. On tho contrary, we propose to treat the present holders very liberally, even to tho extent of allowing them to secure to themselves all community created values up to tho time of the passing of this proposed law, our object being simply to secure to the community all future community-created values. The argument that present properties belonging to public bodies, such as the Feilding Borough Council, would be resumed by tho State, is childish, seeing that these properties already belong to the people, municipal activity being a part of tlie State machine. Mr Andrew's concluding remarks contradict themselves. He states that the New Zealand Labour Party have adopted the motto that "What we decide must ho right, for the forco of numbers is behind us." Ho then immediately follows this up with the assertion that we will respect no law which will lead ihe way fo majority rule." Further comment i* unnecessary. The New Zealand Labour Party hasovery confidence in the electors fo decide in a democratic manner not only who shall govern them, but also how thoy shall be governed.—l am, etc., E .TUNNICLI.FF. Aorangi, December, 1919.