MODERATION OF LAND PRICES AGAIN DENOUNCED BY THE NATIONAL PARTY

Grey River Argus, 28 October 1948, Page 7

MODERATION OF LAND PRICES AGAIN DENOUNCED BY THE NATIONAL PARTY

(Per Press Association). WELLINGTON, October 27.

The House of Representatives to-night continued the second reading debate on the Servicemen’s Settlement and Land Sales Amendment Bill, members of the Opposition attacking the principle of control of the prices of land.

Mr W. A. Bodkin (Nat., Central Otago) asserted that under three Bills dealing with land introduced by the Government this session, freehold as it had been known for generations, would disappear.. The other Bills to which he referred, were the Land Bill, and the Land Valuation Court Bill. He said that the Crown tenants should not delude themselves that they could now exchange their leases for a real freehold. It would be the old usehold. He. asked what would the freehold be worth if its value were to be fixed by a State Department under a Socialist regime which would determine in detail the interest of the so-called owner in the land itself and ajso in the improvements, and if another State Department would decide to whom the land could be transferped and on what conditions. He declared that the Government’s policy had been cleverly camouflaged. It had been divided into several Bills. One section of the community which would understand what was being done would be the Communists. Mr Bodkin said that the rights of the so-called owner under the freehold as it would in future would be severely constricted. The freehold would simply disappear. He said that the National Party, if it had an opportunity, would certainly repeal the Land Sales Act. It would do so as soon as it could get the country on an even keel. Because of chaotic conditions and because of the inflationary policy of the Government, he said, however, some form of control would be necessary for some time. Mr H. E. Combs (Govt., Onslow) said that more returned soldiers had been settled on the land in the two years after their return from World War II than had been settled in the five years after the First World War. Mr T. Shand (Nat., Marlborough): What rot.

Mr Combs: The statistics and the reports prove it. Mr Combs said that every effort was being made to acquire land for settlement, and the men who were taking up land to-day had a reasonable chance of making good, whereas many of the soldier settlers after the First World War were in a hopeless position. Mr W. Freer (Govt., Mt. Albert) said that the only people who would benefit under the scheme that the Opposition had suggested—that any difference between the present day prices of land and those of 1942 should be paid to the vendor of land from the Consoliated Fund or some other fund —would be those who to-day were withholding their land from sale until such a scheme as that of the Opposition operated. Mr Freer denied that it was the intention of the Government to take

over and to nationalise land. He agreed that there was a large area of the Crown land which could be developed, but a difficulty lay in the fact that the necessary materials were in very short supply. Mr R. G. Gerard (Nat., Ashburton) asked if any Government member would deny that land sales legislation would be placed permanently on the Statute Book. He said the Government preferred to do injury to a ■minority of people, who in this case were those who had land, and- it wanted ex-servicemen to settle on it, but those who had land could not afford to sell it at the 1942 prices.

MINISTER WELCOMES AGREEMENT ON BILL Hon. C. F. Skinner, replying to the debate, said that it was gratifying that there had been no criticism of the Servicemen’s Settlement and Land Sales Amendment Bill, which was one of the few Bills that had ever been introduced ond which had met wit’-> approval. There had been criticism of the Land Sales Act. He knew that the Act was not perfect and that it had not achieved perfecly that which it had set out to achieve. At the same time, he aid not know of any piece of legislation which was 100 per cent. He would say, however, that the Land Sales Act had achieved to a large extent what it set out to do. He would shudder to think what would have hannened to the land or the country had this Act not been in operation Mr Skinner said that if the Government had been prepared to settle returned men on rough land or on virgin bush, then it could have settled thousands of them thereon. But the settlement of the soldiers on that basis could not be successful. He did not know of dny blocks of land which had been fully developed before they were settled, unless the land was 'purchased in a fully developed state. „„„„„„ Mr Skinner said that 200,000 acres of new land had already been settled under the Government’s schemes, and, in some instances, the productivitv of the land had been increased as much as five-fold as development progressed. The old bogy that the Government would .nationalise the land, said the Minister, had been effectively exploaed bv these Bills that were before, the House this session. There had been an increase in the numbers oi persons owning their own land and owning their own houses since the Government took office. That was an effective answer to that. The Bill was read the second time and was referred to the Lands Committee.