Local Body Members Criticise Operation Of The Land Sales Act

Greymouth Evening Star, 13 August 1947, Page 7

Local Body Members Criticise Operation Of The Land Sales Act

Allegations that the operation of the Land Sales Act was retarding the establishment of secondary industries, as well as the settlement of returned servicemen on the land, by depressing values below the figure that vendors were prepared to accept, was made at today’s meeting of the executive of the South Island Local Bodies’ Association, at Greymouth.

It was suggested by the chairman, Mr E. 11. Andrews (Mayor of Christchurch) that the principal difficulties arose through inconsistencies in valuations and he added that it appeared to many that Government valuers from outside districts did not know the values as well as those who were domiciled in the particular district.

• Replying to the association’s representations that there should be greater discretionary powers for Land Sales Committees in dealing with applications in relation to the establishment of new industries in the South Island, the Minister of Lands (Mr C. F. Skinner) stated that the Government had kept a close watch on the general operation of the Act and recent decisions on appeals and had concluded that the Act gave the court discretion to deal fairly with owners of Industrial lands. The Government did not consider that any amendment to the Act was justified. The chairman said he did not think the association’s representations dealt so much with the actual regulations as with inconsistencies. When the Appeal Court fixed the sum to be paid for a block of land on the railway, with a siding, at about £250 an acre —at which figure the owners would not sell-—and then another block without a siding was allowed to go through at £4OO an acre, buyers and sellers did not know where they were. Valuation Question Government valuers, continued Mr Andrews, seemed to give low valuations and private valuers higher, with the committees striking a happy medium between them. Some who had gone into the matter felt that Government valuers from outside districts did not know values as well as those who were domiciled in the district. The question was whether the Government could not use more experienced men. There were often many changes in valuers, and it did not seem to him (Mr Andrews) that new men could have the same knowledge of valuing as men who had lived many years in a locality. In regard to industrial .sites, the Minister’s letter was pretty decisive —that the Government was not prepared to do anything in the matter, but some council members considered that certain land should be of more value to an industrialist than to a man who wanted to build a few private houses. For instance, in one case in Christchurch, a difference of £3OOO or £4OOO meant nothing to a company with a capital of £1,000,000, but it meant a great deal to the vendors—a trustee company, and the result was that it looked as if the land concerned was going to be idle for many years. “That sort of thing leads one to believe that the operation of the Act is retarding the progress of the district,” concluded Mr Andrews. “I do not think we should do any more in the matter,” said Mr D. C. Cameron (Mayor of Dunedin). “I think that this matter is outside the jurisdiction of the association. We should do all possible to foster secondary industry, but I doubt the wisdom of the association criticising the decisions of a judicial body set up in

this country. They hear all the evidence and we don’t.”

Value of Act

Mr Cameron went on to quote a case in Dunedin where a house sold at auction to an ex-serviceman for £2650 had been reduced by the Land Sales Committee to £2OOO and added that, although there may have been instances where factory sites should have been allowed to go through, he believed the committees and the court had done good work in writing down exorbitant values of properties. To the extent that there had been absurd instances of prices paid at auctions, he agreed with Mr Cameron, said Mr Andrews, but he also considered that if members thought there was any action retarding their districts they had the right to discuss it. “It is- not a question of criticising decisions of the court but of recording effects of legislation,” said the Mayor of Greymouth, Mr F. A. Kitchingham. “If industries are prevented from starting, we certainly have got reason to' take the matter up.

Mr Sim (Invercargill) said he thought the association had a right to make representations to assist in the decentralisation of industries. Mr D. J. Cockburn (Arrowtown) said he thought the association’s request to the Minister was a sound and reasonable one. He also felt that the same restrictions were affecting the settlement of servicemen throughout New Zealand. He understood that there were hundreds on the waiting list for farms and businesses and that, but for the uncertainty created in the minds of vendors, the position would not be so accute. Fears of Vendors

“Would we not be within our rights in urging to the Government that the regulations in regard to the settlement of soldiers on the land should be eased?” asked Mr Cockburn. “I think we all know that the chief reason why hundreds of farms are not made available is the fear of vendors that they might be putting a noose round their necks.”

Mr Sharman (Nelson) said he thought the trouble lay with the valuers. When they went to an industrial site they should be able to value it as such. “I thing the whole trouble is through their not using common sense in their job,” he added.

After some further discussion on the effects of the legislation, Mr Kitchingham said that the long and the short of it appeared to be that because the way land values were being depressed by the court vendors would not sell. Mr’ Sim moved that the association should urge that special inducement should be allowed for industries to be set up in rural districts, but failed to find a seconder, and the letter from the Minister was received.