STATE ADVANCES OFFICE.

Manawatu Standard, Volume LV, Issue 90, 14 March 1935, Page 9

STATE ADVANCES OFFICE.

LIABILITY FOR RATES. A point involving tbe liability of the State Advances Office for rates consequent upon the enacting of tbe Mortgage Corporation Bill was discussed by the Manawatu County Council, on Tuesday, following the receipt of a letter from tbe Christchurch City Council stating that it had been placed at a very serious disadvantage through the State Advances Department repudiating liability for rates and that it would now' appear that the Mortgage Corporation Bill would further increase the council’s difficulties. It was apparently the intention, the letter went on, that properties covered by the provisions of the Bill would be recorded as being in tbe same category as properties over which the State Advances Office has a mortgage, with the result that a very serious -loss was threatened in rates. The council had written, protesting against the passing of legislation which would have this effect, and solicited the support of the Manawatu County Council in its move.

“I don’t know whether that statement is quite right,” said Cr. J. Perrett, following the reading of the letter. In reply, Cr. J. Boyce said he had seen a statement by Rt. Hon. J. G. Coate.s that the Corporation would be in the same category as a private mortgagee. ~ . , Cr. Perrett said it was amazing to him that after the Government had brought forward legislation to help the country everybody appeared to be against it. „ „ . , The chairman (Cr. W. E. Barber) said that the question in his mind was whether the council should support the Christchurch City Council. Cr. Perrett: I would like to point out that the Christchurch Citv Council is largely a Labour body and, having been unable to get their point forward in one wa- they are trying to do so in another. Cr A. N. Morcom thought the council should support the letter. In bis opinion politics did not enter into the matter at all. . . Cr. W. E. Pearce gave it as his opinion that tlie Corporation was going to be liable for rates. This view was supported hv Or. Boyce, who claimed that, notwitht tan ding this, the point contained in the letter was an important one which, virtually affected local bodies. “As far as I can see, the Bill which is now before the House .is quite 0.1-right,” right,” said Cr. Perrett. “I agree with you,” stated Cr. Morcom, “but at tlie same time I don t think it will do any harm to support the letter.” . . Cr. Perrett: Will it do any good to protest against it? _ . Cr. Boyce: It certainly will. It is election year and it the Government gets a number of objections to whatever it is proposing to do it will sit up a.nd take notice. The chairman said he could not see that any harm would be done in suj>porting the Christchurch Citv Council, the meeting agreeing to this course without further discussion, Cr. Perrett alone dissenting.