PARLIAMENT

Manawatu Standard, Volume LVIII, Issue 8, 7 December 1937, Page 7

PARLIAMENT

DEBATE ON PETROLEUM BILL SUPPLEMENTARY ESTIMATES APPEAR In the House of Representatives yesterday urgency was taken for the Petroleum Bill, on wliicli a debate was staged on the second reading. The measure, which vests oil resources in the State, was explained by the Minister of Milies (Hon. P. C. Webb), the chief opposition in the,, House being advanced against the provision enabling the Crown to take all royalties, it being contended that such a clause violated the rights of the Maoris under the Treaty of Waitangi. Mr W. J. Broadfoot moved an amendment that all land-owners receive a proportion of the royalties for petroleum found on their properties, but the adjournment was taken before the debate could be pursued. The Supplementary Estimates, providing for the expenditure of £1,613,318, appeared. Of this amount £297,837 is represented by annual appropriations in the Ordinary Revenue Account of the Consolidated Fund. Additional votes chargeable against the Public Works Fund total £871,945, and the balance of £443,536 is made up by votes for separate accounts and accounts outside the Public Account.

SEARCH FOR OIL. COMPREHENSIVE EFFORT, GOVERNMENT’S AIM.

Victoria. In fact, it was laid down throughout the Empire that oil belonged to the Crown. The New Zealand Government, however, had made provision for compensation to pro-perty-owners should damage result to their properties. The whole question was a national one. Everyone must see what a wonderful thing it would be for the Dominion, both in peace and war, if oil were discovered. If war broke out. the transport of fuel supplies would be cut out almost immediately. Australia would be in the same position, and the Commonwealth would gladly welcome the discovery of oil in New Zealand, so dose to lier own shores.

Per Press Association. WELLINGTON. Dec. 6.

When the House of Representatives met at 2.30, the Supplementary Estimates were introduced by GovernorGeneral’s Message and referred to the Committee of Supply. Urgency was accorded the passing of the Petroleum Bill, moving the committal of which the Minister of Mines (Hon. P. C. Webb) stressed the value of the discovery of oil in commercial quantities in the Dominion. It would prove a tremendous stimulus to the industry of the country. Under the present law an adequate search for oil was not being made, and it was quite impossible for small enterprise, with antiquated equipment, to ascertain whether we had oil or not. When lie had visited Taranaki the fact had impressed itself upon him that we did have oil, perhaps in small quantities, but nevertheless oil. The Minister said he had then made the statement that he intended to introduce legislation based on the lines of the English legislation, by which difficulties in the way of a proper search for oil in the Dominion would be removed and an adequate search for the commodity would be enabled, either by the State or private enterprise. If private enterprise failed, he would have no hesitation whatever in asking the Government to prosecute a search. He had decided to grant prospecting licenses _ on ■ the lines of the English legislation, covering 200 square miles, and mining privileges covering 100 square miles. The fact that no real effort to discover oil was being made on a large scale demonstrated amply that the present law did not meet the requirements of the age. The Government was determined that a comprehensive effort should be made. .RIGHT TO ROYALTIES. Mr Webb proceeded to deal with the question of royalties. He stated that oil was a very migratory commodity. For instance. a bore might be put down in Parliament Grounds and oil discovered, but that oil might come from under properties miles away. It was only right that the_ Crown should have the right to royalties on that oil. Property-owners under, whose property the oil might come knew nothing of it, and the Bill laid down the fundamental principle in connection with royalties which had been laid down in the British House of Commons in 1934, in Western Australia in 1935, also in

Mr Webb paid a tribute to the president and secretary of the Farmers’ I Union for their broadminded .view in ! connection with the matter. Mr W. W. Mulholland had said that, personally, he would not oppose the rights of the Crown regarding oil if found on private property. However, he had made certain stipulations regarding rights of entrv to private property, which the Minister had included in the Bill. The Bill had been accorded support in many of the big papers of the Dominion, which held it would remove obstacles in the way of adequate prospecting. Before one gallon of oil could he exported from New Zealand, said 'Mr Webb, the demands of the local market must be met. The question of the rights of Maoris had been mentioned, but he assured them that the Government would go to any extent xo protect the rights of the Native people. He emphasised, however, that there must not be two laws in this country—one for Europeans and one for Maoris. The Government was not interfering with the mineral rights of any property-owners, but it did say that, if as a result of the expenditure of a lot of money, they discovered a payable flow of oil. it should belong to the people of New Zealand. The Maoris would benefit to an equal extent as the pakeha. PROVISION OF CAPITAL.

"When the Bill was passed, capital would be available, both overseas and in New Zealand; for one of the biggest prospecting schemes for oil which had ever been attempted in New Zealand. If it were not found, they would at least have the satisfaction or Knowing that a thorough search had been made to find it. He appealed to members not to take a parochial view of the matter, and explained that the Bill had been amended to allow companies to have the use of natural gas which they might discover. He added he would not like to see the Native question arise in relation to the Bill. He had gone to a lot of trouble, along with the Solicitor-General, to see that rights granted under the Bill did not infringe those conferred on Maoris under the Treaty of Waitangi, which laid down rights of equality and justice for both races. The same principles were contained in this Bill; they wanted to co-ordinate with the Maoris as brothers. The Bill would not lie instrumental in taking a penny from the Native race or the owners of freehold properties, but it did say that the Crown had the right to the oil under the ground of which owners of property had no knowledge. With regard to the fixing of prospectors’ license fees at £IOOO for 200 acres, the Minister added that they had fixed a substantial fee because they did not want people coming along and paying, say, a 5s fee and holding up the discovery of oil. When the Bill became law, in three months’ time or so, he had an assurance that an effort would immediately be made to drill for oil. “WENT TOO FAR ”. Sir Apirana Ngaui said the present measure was not an easy one to oppose, and the reasons put forward by the Minister for its passing were very difficult ones with which to quarrel. As a representative of the Maori people, however, he did think the Bill went too far. In one respect the Minister had not convinced himself or anyone in the House or outside it That royalties or petroleum belonged to the Crown.

Mr Webb: Would you support the Bill if that provision were removed? Sir Apirana Ngata: It is too late now. The honourable gentleman has shown his hand ; he has made it plain that the Government is going to take the royalty. Sir Apirana Ngata added that the Natives would not be able to understand why, If prospectors put down a bore on Maori land and discovered oil, they (the Maoris) should get nothing out of it. The declaration in the Bill meant that something that the Maoris possessed before this Bill • was introduced was to be taken away from them. He appealed to the conscience of the Government to avert a misunderstanding, which should not exist, especially when the Government was attempting to do something for tile benefit of the Dominion. “NEW INTERPRETATION.”

Sir Apirana Ngata said he could not understand what the Government was doing to entitle it to a royalty of 6 per cent, or more. He could not see why the rights of Native landowners should be subjected unnecessarily to the public interest. It was a new type of equality which was being given to the Maoris and was setting the pace for the poor pakeha landowner. It was a new interpretation of Waitangi. If the Government paid £6OOO for rights to _ Native lands under water, as it did in the case of lake beds in Rotorua, Rotoiti and other lakes, also £3OOO for similar rights at Taupo, why should* the Government deprive the Natives of of rights to oil beneath their own properties. He continued that, if oil were struck on the East Coast, they would have deputations of Maoris session after session, asking that the-- should be given something that had Veen taken away

from them. He suggested that the Maoris should divide any royalties with the Crown. Experts had agreed for many years that oil existed on the East Coast, and a legend had grown ■up among the Maori people concerning it. They hoped that something, somewhere, sometime would turn up. REASON AGAINST PAYMENT.

A COMMON FUND? Mr E. T. Tirikatene congratulated the Government for its services to the Maoris during its tw r o years of office. Continuing after the supper adjournment, Mr Tirikatene also referred to the rights of the Maoris under the Treaty of Waitangi, which the Maoris regarded as their Magna Cluirta. He suggested that some sort of royalties, if petroleum were found on Maori land, should he paid into a common fund for the general benefit of the Maoris as a whole. The Maoris would not obstruct anything that would be of national benefit, but there was something to be said for Sir Apirana Ngata’s appeal, which he had made through the Maori mind. Mr W. J. Broadfoot said the Treaty of Waitangi was a sovereign treaty and could not be altered without dueprovision being made for compensation being paid to Maoris for petrol taken from their lands. It was only on the question of royalties that the Opposition disagreed with the Government. The Opposition said the royalty should go to the indivdual, and not to the Government. AMENDMENT MOVED.

Mr J. Thorn stated that the first and main reason against the payment of royalties on petroleum to private individuals was that it might flow under 100 different properties. Why should royalties be paid to private individuals in New Zealand when the Conservative Government of Great Britain in 1934 had refused to recognise any such rights, and when it was at present also considering the wiping 'out of private royalties on coal ? •

Sir Apirana: On payment of compensation. Mr Thorn: Yes, but they are wiping it out all the same. He contended that the natural resources of New Zealand were not owned by any individual pakeha or Maori, hut by the whole of the people. It was easy to conceive that the time would come when the Maoris themselves would regard the Treaty of Waitangi as a dead letter, because in other ways they were secured in their rights and no longer had need of the provisions of the treaty. BREACH OF TREATY?

The motion before the House, said Air Broadfoot, was “that the Bill be committed.” He moved that all the words after “that” be omitted for the purpose of inserting the following words: “That the Bill be referred back to the Government with a view of inserting the follovdng words: ‘That a portion of the royalty paid for petroleum won shall be paid to all owners of land, except in such cases where the title held by any owner specifies that the mineral rights are the property of the Crown and that in the case of owners of Native land individual owners should receive not less than the amount specified for European owners, but such amount shall be not less than 50 The amendment was seconded by Air S. G. Smith. per cent, of the royalty received.” The Alinister of Lands (Hon. F. Lungstone) then moved the adjournment of the debate and the House rose at 10.40. ADDITIONAL VOTES. SUPPLEMENTARY ESTIMATES. ALLOCATIONS ANNOUNCED. Per Press Association. WELLINGTON, Dec. (5.

Mr W. A. Bodkin strongly opposed the principle of denying propertyowners the right to share in royalties. He could commend the Government for making it possible for private enterprise to do prospecting in New Zealand, and the greatest admission that the Government was looking to private companies to undertake the work could be found in the deletion of the original clause which gave the Government the right to take-over any field once oil had been found. Regarding the question of royalties, lie said no one could say that a Bill which took away the' clear rights of the Maoris was not a breach of the Treaty of Waitangi. Tbs present Government was making history, for it was on the way to breaking up the tradition that, where a treaty had been drawn between the British Government and the Native people, the rights of the Natives were never denied them. Certain land on the East Coast of the North Island, owned byMaoris, had been explored by all American firm, and that firm had entered into an agreement with the owners of the property to pay them 5 per cent royalty iii the event of oil being found in payable quantities. The Government was seeking to pass a Bill removing the right of the Maoris to those royalties.

Mr W. M. C. Denham said the only provision which had been objected to was that royalties should go to the Crown. He contended that the Bill in no way infringed the rights of the Maoris under the Treaty of Waitangi. There was a great need for a thorough exploration for oil in this country, and he hoped that, as a result of the Bill, oil would lie discovered in payable quantities in New Zealand.

Mr W. P. Endean said the main difference between the ideas of tlie ()p J position and the Government on the Bill concerned the payment of royalties ; otherwise the' opinions of both sides of the House were pretty much the same. He favoured the Bill up to the extent of the payment of royalties, but he would suggest that not only Maori but also pakeha landowners should have rights to the ,payment of royalties. REASONABLE SECURITY.

Mr H. AI. Christie said there was no product of more importance to any country than oil. The Bill gave some reasonable security to the people prepared to spend large sums in tlie search for oil. It had been stated earlier in the debate that the amount of oil beneath the ground could be accurately estimated from the surface, but he contended that the only real way of ascertaining the quantity of oil was boring for it. New Zealand, with all the upheavals of Nature we had had, must be one of tlie most difficult countries in the world for accurate surface estimate, and the companies which had to go to the expense of making these deep bores must have some form of protection and security. Approximately 2,500,000 gallons of crude oil had been seemed in New’ Zealand as a result of prospecting and boring—only sufficient to produce enough petrol to supply our needs for one week. This w’as most unsatisfactory. He contended that oil would not be obtained in the Dominion in the form of gushers or surface oil, but only from deep bores, and these expensive companies doing the w’ork must be .assured of some adequate return for it and for the investment of their capital. Mr Christie added that the Opposition had. suddenly become vev’ concerned about the rights of the Maoris. In fact, the Opnosition’s onlv real objection to the Bill seemed to be the rights taken over. Native lands by the Crown. There had been unite a numl>er of interpretations of the Treaty of Waitangi, but lie could not see thnt there bad been anv infringement whatever of Maori rights in the Bill. Native owners were being treated in exa.ctlv the same way as other freeholders. NO DESIRE TO IMPEDE.

Rt. Hon. J. G. Coates said there was no desire of the Opposition to impede the search for oil in the Dominion, and he had no objection to the Crown assuming control of the commodity. He compared the English with the New Zealand legislation, and said the difference was tlmt petroleum had been discovered in New Zealand, there were wells producing crude oil here today. H" argued that care should he observed to prevent the banding over of our oil to wealthy interests overseas.

Mr Webb: Don’t you think the Bill provides for tlmt? Mr Coates : If it is left to the present Minister, I would be quite satisfied that nothing of tho sort would happen. Mr Coates continued to refer to the rights conferred upon the Maoris by the Treaty of Waitangi. The Maori people believed that everything that war. beneath Maori land belonged to them, and everything above it, too. Both Maori men and women had said the Bill could only be put into force over their dead bodies. He did not believe the Minister would w'illingly offend the Maori race; in fact, he would be the last man in the world to do so, and he thought Mr Webb would be wise to reconsider the question of royalties as it affected the Maori race. He also advocated that, say, 50 per cent, of the 5 per cent, royalty should be paid to the pakeha landowner on whose property oil was discovered. Mr J. O’Brien said that Maoris, giving evidence before the Native Affairs Committee, which was considering the Bill, had said they might lose their temper if anybody walked over their land. There was no reference to oil prospectors going over Maoris’ dead bodies, as had been stated by Mr Coates. If there were oil in New Zealand, said Mr O’Brien, referring to the payment of royalties, it might be under dozens of different land holdings and it would be difficult to know to whom the royalty was to be paid. If a good flow of oil were found in the Dominion, and the Government collected a royalty, both Natives and Europeans would benefit.

Additional expenditure totalling £1,613,318 for the current financial year is provided for in tlie Supplementary Estimates, which were presented in tlie House to-day. The detailed increases are:—

Legislative Department 4,161 Prime Minister’s Department 548 Finance 25,806 General administration 82,489 Law arid order .■ 7,172 Defence 5,054 Alaintenance 28,300 Development of primary and secondary industries 204,615 Social services Credit 60,303 Public Works Fund 871,945 Land for settlements 65,000 State coal mines 3,771 State Forests Account 1,238 Working- Railways Account 91,698 Post Office Account 219, (329 Public Trustee’s Account 13,325 Government Insurance Account ... 790 Public Service Superannuation ... 295 State Fire Insurance 27,385 Dairy Industry Account 1,490 Broadcasting Account 18,915

With the additional expenditure shown in the Supplementary Estimates, which make for salary increases arising from the reclassification of the Civil Service, the total estimated expenditure under all headings for tins financial year amounts to £62,898,618. The following are points of interest taken from the various departmental votes:—

Internal Affairs Department.—£Bo6 for buildings and equipment for the Rotorua game farm; £353 for the Rotorua, trout hatchery; £440 for the Tongariro trout hatchery; £IOOO for allowances and travelling expenses to members of the National Council of Physical Welfare and Recreation'; £1313 as New Zealand’s share of the cost of the painting of the Coronation to be presented to His Majesty the King; £I2OO towards the cost of collecting and assembling moa. bones at Wanganui; £6OO for assistance to swimming and life-saving societies; £3OOO to cover the preliminary expenses of the national health and superannuation scheme, including salary and allowances to the Imperial Civil Service actually loaned to New Zealand; refund of £1228 in New Zealand currency by the Prime Minister, Mr Savage, from a grant of £ISOO sterling for his visit to the Coronation and Imperial Conference. External Affairs. —£4350 for additional improvements and maintenance of reparation estates in Western Samoa; £4OOO to cover additional working expenses of the motor vessel Maui Poinare. Marine Department. —A credit of £SOO from the £2OOO provided to cover New Zealand’s share of the cost of the Lincoln Ellsworth Relief Expedition. Labour Department.—£923 to cover the cost of the sala.ries of nominated members and officials of the Second Arbitration Court. Legislative Department. —£100 for installation of telephone exchange m Parliament Buildings. Land and Income Tax Department. —Additional payment of £1530 for overtime and meal allowances necessitated bv late fvassing of this year s taxing legislation. Naval Service. —£554 in settlement of claim from the Australian Government for damage to H.M.A.S. Sydney by the Admiralty oil tanker Nucula at Auckland ; £4500 for the purchase of land at Devonport for the site of the Royal Naval Barracks ; armv grants of £350 towards the regimental funds of territorial units. SCHOOL OF AGRICULTURE. Maintenance ot public works and services.—£3o,ooo tor the maintenance and repairs of river protection works throughout the Dominion ; £50,000 for additional plant for the Agricultural Department; a grant of £27,000 to cover the establishment of a school of agriculture, which will decide the policy of agricultural instruction and allocate moneys received from Government sources and bequests (the grant of £15,000 to Massey College on the main Estimates to be included in this sum); additional grants of £15,000 for the railway carriage of lime for farmers ; £58,000 as portion of freight rates on fertilisers and £13,000 as portion of freight rates on farm produce. Tourist and Publicity Department. —£5700 for the purchase of film and photographic equipment for special publicity work; £3OOO for the erection of thermal baths at Taupo. Scientific and Industrial Research Department.—£2so, tor the purchase of linen flax seed from England to be grown by selected farmers in Canterbury and Marlborough with a view to establishing the linen flax industry in New Zealand.

Transport Department.— £3500 to cover additional expenses of the road safety campaign. Health Department.—An additional bounty of £SO to the parents of the quadruplets born in Dunedin. Education Department.—Adddionai grants of £4848 to the Uim 3 , l(]dileges for general porpos ,

tional grant of £20,000 for the maintenance of school buildings and training colleges; £2630 for the New Zealand Institute for the Blind.

• Pensions Department. (credit) for the amount provided in the main Estimates but not required. Railway construction. • —■ Additional •grant of £IOO,OOO for the GisborneWaikokopu section of the East Coast railway, a similar grant being made for the Wharanui-Parnassus section of the South Island main trunk. Public buildings.—£34,ooo for the acquisition of properties in Molesworth Street and Lambton Quay, Wellington, for departmental buildings; £23,000 for the purchase of land for the proposed new mental hospital at Marton.

Irrigation, w'ater supply and drainage.—£lo,ooo on account df the Downs water supply scheme, Canterbury, and £24,950, in addition to the main Estimates vote of £207,000, to cover general requirements. Native land settlement. —£69,000 on land development schemes and £IOOO on the acquisition of new land, to be recovered • by estimated receipts of £70.000 from development schemes.

Working Railways Account. —£60,813 to cover the cosn of adjustments in connection with anomalies arising out of the introduction of the 40-hour week, £28,000 to cover the cost of re-grading in the first division of the railway service. Post Office Account. Additional payment of £20.000 for bank exchange, commission discount, and stamp duty necessitated by the increase in moneyorder and other funds remitted to the United Kingdom and elsewhere.