DEPOSITS NEEDED

Gisborne Herald, Volume LXXV, Issue 22588, 17 March 1948, Page 7

DEPOSITS NEEDED

LAND SETTLEMENT HAWKE’S BAY QUERY

GISBORNE CASE QUOTED THE fact that in some land ballots held in Hawke’s Bay the Lands Department had required prospective settlers to lodge substantial sums by way of deposit, whereas in other cases no such payments had been called for, was quoted in a discussion on ballot conditions which took place in Hastings among returned men awaiting sections under rehabilitation.

One speaker declared that deposits of from £SOO to £2OOO were called for in certain blocks, and he contended that this requirement closed the blocks to many of the prospective ballotees. It gave the pre-emptive right to these sections to men with substantial finance. Limit of Finance It was pointed out by another speaker that the limit of finance provided under the Rehabilitation Act for a sheepfarm wa s £6250, and that where the value of the section was higher than that figure the ex-service-man was expected to lodge evidence that he could invest part at least of the excess price. The organiser of the discussion held that it was not the fault of the ballotee if the department purchased land which could not bo brought within the limit of £6250, which in any case he considered ridiculously low in view of present costs. The position seenied to vary in different districts, and was worse in the Wairarapa and Gisborne districts than in Hawke’s Bay. The chairman, Mr. S. I. Jones, stated that he had not known of the provision for deposits, and would take the matter up with the Lands Department to secure full information.

The reference to conditions in the Gisborne district probably relates to the purchase by the Government of the Mungaroa property in the Ruakituri area. The value of this property was so high, and the number of sections into which it could be subdivided was so small, that the finding of four settlers with £ISOO each in private funds was made a condition of its purchase by the Land Settlement Board. The men who qualified for this property were all willing and anxious to make their contribution, in view of the high value of the sections which became available to them.

In general, where the value of a block on offer to the Crown is substantially in excess of the nominal limits of rehabilitation finance this practice is followed by the Land Settlement Board. The effect is to make land available in certain areas in which otherwise, it would not be economical for the board to purchase. The prospective settlers are not obliged to find the whole of the excess price, as provision exists :'or the rehabilitation authorities to increase the grant to the settler, over and above the £6250 limit, in proportion to the private finance the settler is willing i;o commit to the project.