PARLIAMENT.

Hawera & Normanby Star, Volume LVIII, Issue LVIII, 7 December 1909, Page 5

PARLIAMENT.

MONDAY, DECEMBER 6. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES. IfRESS ASSOCIATION.! WELLINGTON, December 6. LAND LAWS AMENDMENT BILL. In the House this afternoon, Mr Wright resumed the interrupted debate on. the report of the committee on the Land Laws Amendment Bill, which the Chairman moved should lie on the table, and Mr Herries moved as an amendment,. That the minutes of the proceedings of the committee be laid on the fable. Mr Wright said he was unable from the Premier's speeches to say whether Sir Joseph Ward was a leaseholder or a freeholder. The policy of the administration on the land question meant the downfall of the party. It meant the , negation of democracy, of liberalism, and of principle.. The Government's policy was purely an opportunist one, based on retention of office at any price. He hoped-the Government would abandon their Land Bill. Mr Taylor (Christchurch) said rural lands had increased enormously in value, not only as the results of owners' efforts, but as the result of the labors of the community. Referring to Mr McKenzie's position in the Cabinet, he said that the Minister had driven the wedge into the Liberal party at Rangitikei. What authority had Mr McKenzie, he asked, to speak for the

•■ Cabinet in offering the freehold, and' thus giving the Liberal policy away? Perhaps the time would come when the national \ endowments would be given away, not to save the Liheral party, but to preserve the Cabinet. This Land 1 Bill, tnis abortion, this thing without shape or form, had, said Mr Taylor, been conceived by the Government in •secret, and when it came tottering into the House members were supposed to accept it without question. The democratic sentiment of the country on the land question, which ought to be he line of demarcation between the parties, had been The Liberal party had no policy, no leader. The Government was too weak to lead, and the press was palsied, and it was in

vain to look to it for help^. Mr Guthrie, speaking of his attitude in committee, said he was proud of having the freehold clauses retained. There were 54 freeholders in the House, which was a clear indication that the majority of the electors. demanded the freehold. The Government had only carried out its declared policy, which was to find out what the people want, and give it to them. Mr Arnold defended Mr Guthrie's action in committee on the Bill, as the latter was a declared freeholder. Thpre were five leaseholders and five freeholders on the committee, so thjat a casting vote was necessary to retain the'clauses if the whole of the members were present. He believed that at the second meeting a leasehold member who had at the first meeting voted against the freehold clauses, . reversed his vote, [•with the result that the clauses, were reinstated. The Government _ would have apparently no hesitation in forcing the Land Bill through the House with the Opposition votes, but would regard the action of the leasehold supporters in voting with the • Opposition at any time, as the' greatest political crime that could be commited. The Hon. J. Millar said.he was amused at the charges made against him of abandoning his principles. These had not changed. There was nothing in the Bill to abolish the leasehold tenure, aaid it appeared to him the time of the House was being wasted for the sake of 4417 Land for Settlement tenants. The Government secured fhe unearned increment under the freehold clauses of the Bill to the extent of one-fifth of the increase in value every 33 years.

Speaking for himself, he was quite prepared to go to the country and get the question settled, the better as. far as ■the present Cabinet was concerned. The 9,000.000 acres endowment would be retained. The debate was adjourned, until tomorrow afternoon.

The Shipping and Seamen's Bill was put through its final stages.

LANDS FOR SETTLEMENT ADMINISTRATION BILL.

The Premier moved the second read- ! ing of the Lands for Settlement Administration Bill to amend the law relating to the acquisition and administration of lands for settlement. He explained at length the principal clauses of the Bill as they relate to finance, lands administration, limitation of areas, and modification of the Workers' Dwelling Act and the alteration in the Valuation Rolls Bill. Ho pointed out, inter alia, that it repealed section 52 of the principal Act, and provided that successful applicants in ballots under the Act who dispose of their land shall be disqualified from taking part in further ballots for five years, and successful applicants for rural lands would be required to reside continuously on allotments for ton years. • Mr Massey said the Bill evidently contemplated the passing of the Stato Guaranteed Advances Bill, and would not seriously interfere with the Lauds for Settlement Act. He hoped when the Bill was in committee provision would be made for men of energy with small capital to settlo on limited areas of land. Ho had expected that some attempt would be made to improve the methods of the Lands for Settlement scheme in the direction of granting the freehold to sottlers in regard to reduced limitation of areas allowed to be held. Mr Massey said this ought to be based on the size of a man's family, each case being treated on its merits. The provision for compulsory taking of land within a 15-milo radius of towns having a population of 5000 would operate harmfully on farmers near towns, and create a feeling of unrest. The Bill was mostly a committee Bill, and ho would deal with it when it reached the committee stage. , . Mr Allen said that the Bill meant altering the nature of the security for loans, and asked, was the Prime Minister pawning our freehold estate to the London financiers? There was no provision for native lands in the Bill, though the amount to be borrowed had been increased from half a million to one million for the purpose of applying the provisions of the Act to native lands. The compulsory clauses m relation to suburban land were too drastic. Mr Hogg strongly opposed the clawpe. taking kind around the boroughs, as this would act prejudicially on small farmers. After much further debate, Sir Joseph i Ward replied, and said the fears about the small farmers In the neighborhood of boroughs was unfounded. The Government had "never taken land from small farmers, and ho would not havo the slightest objection to striking out the word '"compulsory." He had the rnost contempt for men who posed as the workers' friends, yet when a was brought down to help them to., got homos they opposed it. v WELLINGTON, December 7. After midnight the Lands for Settle-

mcnt Administration Bill passed tho second reading. Tho Premier moved the third reading of tho Land for Settlement Finance Bill, which was agreed to on the voices and passed. I The House rose at 12,55 a.m.

POLITICAL NOTES. Will tbs session finally close before Christmas ? If the Government is determined to put through the whole of its programme it seems evident that it will not.- Most of the members view with disfavor the proposal to hold an autumn session. The probabilities are that the Government will drop portion of its programme with a view to an early closing of Parliament, In view of the attitude of the leaseholders the Land Bill- has little chane© of becoming law this year. Negotiations, it is stated, are now proceeding; between the Prime Minister and the leaseholders, in, order, if possible,, to arrive at a compromise,Very little is now heard in the lobbies on the question of licensing legislation. According to the Prime Minister, a Bill on the subject has little chance of passing, unless the parties first come to< an agreement. That the Trade will not agree to the alteration which the Nolicense party desire to make in the compact which was recently made seems almost certain. And, so, the promised Bill is not likely to come down. this, year. During a discussion on the Government's scheme for the housing' o£ Pkuliament, Mr Massey repeated a startling sup'flcestion regarding the great fire which destroyed the Parliamentany

Buildings. He said he would very much like to know what caused the outbreak.. The fire was not accidental; and there were people in the Parliamentary ..Buildings who knew that to be the* case\. Unfortunately, the information which had reached him on the subject was of a confidential nature. He honestly believed what he had been told to be the case. did not know who. was actually responsible for the fire; but would give something to find out. Sir Joseph: Except in connection) with rumors which were afloat at the time, I have never heard anything of the kind.

Mr Massey: "Well, I should' like to* get to the bottom of it.