LEASEHOLD v. FREEHOLD

Hawke's Bay Tribune, Volume I, Issue 206, 18 August 1911, Page 2

LEASEHOLD v. FREEHOLD

LABOUR PARTY AND LEASELEASEHOLD.

WONTHAGGI LEASES A

FAILURE

Melbourne, Aug 11.

In the Legislative Assembly today, Mr. Prendergast, the Opposition parry, moved: — “That a select committee be appointed to inquire into and report upon the method of allotment, the conditions of land tenure, and the general relationship between the State and the tenants in Wonthaggi.” He said he had paid a visit to the district recently, and come to the conclusion that the management of the leasehold land by the Government would lead to nothing but disaster. The 1 position called for immediate inquiry. There hael been mismanagement, and it looked like riding for a fall. Some believers in the leasehold system there were going for freehold because they found their leaseholds were not -what they anticipated or desired. Some wanted freeholds so as to get the value-of the improvements, and leave tfife State to nurse the babv.

The acting-Premier, Mr. Watt, denied that the Government had in the matter of leasehold been riding for a fall. In view of the fact that Wonthaggi Land Bill was so near consideration, it. would be ridiculous to rush away into an inquiry of matters, particularly of land tenure, which were already prepared for settlement. The question of leasehold versus freehold, which •had caused so much trouble with a Labour Administration in another State, could be discussed on that bill. (Hear, hear.) If Mr. Prendergast still desired to show that leasehold was better than freehold, notwithstanding the reversal of form of his confreres in New South Wales, he could do so. (Laughter.) The Government was prepared to recommend tne creation of freeholds on the residential blocks, and miners’ selections now’ leased on fabulously easy terms to the miners. The proposition was to permit whatever money had been paid to be credited to the freehold in some way. It wuld be seen what an extraordinary test Wonthaggi was to the Labour Party on the question of leasehold or freehold ; a test whether a man was likely to be true to public, professions and creed when that creed w r as couiftfir to his particular interest. He did not envy the other side the necessity of reconciling the two positions. The debate was adjourned.