RE UNIMPROVED RATING.

Hawke's Bay Tribune, Volume XXII, Issue 271, 31 October 1932, Page 9

RE UNIMPROVED RATING.

(To the Editor.) Sir,—Mr Crawford accuses me with deliberately confusing the issue with unimproved rating on farm land in boroughs which, he naively states, “has nothing to do with the matter? He further states that under this system “the ratepayers in a borough pay heavily for services from which they do not derive an atom of benefit.” With the latter statement I heartily agree. It is in the first statement that he makes his big mistake. Does not its unfairness in a borough prove it inadequate to conform to varying values sufficiently to give every ratepayer reasonable service for his money and do not these saihe conditions obtain in the country to a large degree? What common interest is there, for instance, between a residential property in Pakowhai and a small sheep farm in the back country. Unimproved rating is only equitable where there is a common interest in both rate values and services rendered, and I submit such is not the case in the country and so the system must fail. It does not seem right to me that an orchardist’s trees should be taxed, but why should he avoid an unfair liability by increasing the rates of other people? Does this uphold his standard of “British fair slay and honour?”—l am, etc., INQUIRER. Havelock North, 30/10/32.