PARLIAMENT

Manawatu Standard, Volume LII, Issue 307, 25 November 1932, Page 7

PARLIAMENT

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES. EXPENDITURE ADJUSTMENT BILL. Per Press Association. WELLINGTON, Nov. 25. The House of Representatives met at 10.30 a.m. Mr W. E. Parry asked whether unemployed women would lie given the same treatment as unemployed men with respect to a fortnight’s pay at Christmas time. Hon. A. Hamilton said it must be recognised that women were in quite a different category. In tlieir case relief consisted mainly of meals and accommodation, and this would he continued on the usual lines throughout the holiday period by the women’s unemployment committees. An appeal to the Prime Minister not to abolish the exemption granted local bodies in respect to ground rents was made bv Mr R. Mclveen when the National Expenditure Adjustment Bill was under consideration in Committee. He said that many local bodies would be placed in a very serious position and the reduction in revenue could only be compensated for by an increase in the _rates. This would mean that the ratepayers generally would have to pay for the relief granted to Seople who, in years gone by, had made andsome profits by receiving high rents for accommodation in buildings erected on property which they had leased at a very low ground rent. Mr McKeen explained that the ground rents charged by local bodies had always been very reasonable, and in tho case of the Wellington City Council they varied in most cases from 41 to 4J per cent. There were a few cases where the rent was a little higher.

Mr Forbes said that a select committee had fully considered the representations from tho local bodies on this subject and had come to the decision that the amendment, abolishing the exemption should stand part of the Bill.

Mr J. A. MacPherson said that the Oamaru local bodies would be seriously affected and emphasised that tho ground rents charged by these authorities had always been very low. No applications for relief Ijad been received.

Mr P. Fraser said that the logic of the argument that there should be no differentiation between the treatment of local bodies and private lessors had to be admitted, but, on the other hand, it must also be realised that tho local bodies had previously been charging lower rentals than the private lessors. Ho suggested that there should be a limit below which the local bodies should not be asked to reduce the rents. Ho mentioned that the average ground rents at present charged by the Wellington Hospital Board amounted to 3i per cent of the value of the land, and 20 per cent reduction on this would mean that the tenants would bo receiving very generous treatment. He asked whether the Prime Minister would consider setting up a tribunal to decide what would be a fair thing in the interests of all parties. If this were not done, there would be instances where people who had in the past been enjoying the advantage of low rents would be receiving a further reduction at the expense of tho general community. Mr R. A. Wright said that the interest on local body debentures had been reduced, but the local bodies did not seem inclined to pass this relief on to their tenants. Continuing, he said that, where any firm received a reduction in the rate of interest it had to pay on borrowed money, it should be made to pass that relief on to the public. He cited the caso of a Wellington firm which had failed to do this.

Mr Forbes: There is nothing to stop them reducing their prices. Mr J. A. Nash: They will not do that unless they have to. Mr Fraser suggested that the leases should be fixed on a 3J per cent. basis. This would give relief to tenants who were hard pressed and would also afford some protection for the local bodies.

Mr Forbes said the Government’s whole concern was to bring about a reduction in rents in as equitable a manner as possible. He pointed out that the Jocai bodies had, the right of appeal and added that, if a revaluation of town and country land were made to-day, the vr.luation of a few years ago would not be susMr W. A. Veitch said tlure was no doubt the local bodies had made a greater saving as the result of tho reduction in interest rates than they would lose in the decreased ground rentals.

Mr W. Nash said that ground rentals were regarded as first mortgages and there was the 5 per cent, minimum with respect to the lafter. For this reason he considered there should be a 5 per cent, minimum applied to ground rents. He was not supporting high rates of interest, but he considered that consistency should be maintained. He did not mind if there was a general reduction to 2) per cent, so long as it was applied throughout. Mr McKeen called for a division on the clause relating to ground rents and the bells were set ringing. However, when the question was again put, he did not press the point and the clause was passed on the voices. The Bill was put through Committee with minor amendments and the House adjourned at 1 p.m.