Security For The Farmer

Manawatu Times, Volume 60, Issue 67, 21 March 1935, Page 7

Security For The Farmer

Mortgagor and Mortgagee

BILL FURTHER DEBATED Per Press Association. WELLINGTON, Last Night. The second reading debato on the Rural Mortgagors’ Bill was resumed in the House of Representatives this afternoon. Mr A. E. Jull asked the Minister to withdraw part 5 of the Bill. It would not come into operation for live years and there was plenty of time to make the provisions contained in that part if necessary. That part was fraught with the greatest danger and he thought it would be a source of trouble between the mortgagee and the mortgagor. Mr AAA E. Barnard said ho was not at all surprised that some members of the Coalition had objections to part 5 of the Bill, and he congratulated Mr Jull on voicing his definite objection to that part. Ho contended that, when the equity clause was withdrawn or amended, there was almost nothing left in the Bill. He contended that no farmer would welcome the budgetary system and said every man desired independence to run his own financial affairs. Mr C. A. Wilkinson said the Bill was a step in the right direction and ho congratulated the- Minister on trying to meet the position in a more libera! way than members of his party were evidently willing to go. Nevertheless, he thought the Bill would' still' be of vital assistance to tho farmer who was in difficulty. Farmers wanted an immediate writing-off of lost capital and also wanted a low rate of interest to tide them over tho present crisis. However, they did not want to wait five years. The suggested term of budgetary control should be reduced to two years. The term peonage had been used during the debate. He believed many farmers were in that state today and that tho Bill would assist them. , The Bill also gave them security of tenure and enabled them to remain on their farms in the hope that better times -would come along. He hoped the Government would accept reasonable amendments in committee, and he suggested that farmers should be provided with legal advice, free of charge, in preparation of cases for the Court or Commission. Freedom from Worry After the tea adjournment Mr AV. P. Enaean said the Bill was absolutely necessary in the interests of the farmer. AA’hat was necessary in New Zealand was that the mortgagor should be freed from worry, so that he could then devote himself to the development of his farm. If a competent organisation was appointed, tho inefficient farmer who hud no chance of succeeding, would bo quietly put off the land and someone else put in his stead. Dealing with the equity clause, he said that provision would not stand any test; it was absolutely opposed to all legal principles. Ho agreed with Mr AVilkinson that the period of five years of budgetary control should be substantially cut down, and he thought the mortgagee should have some right to tako action. At the same time lie congratulated the Government on taking a bold step. Mr It. A. AVright said there was a great deal of “sob-stuff’’ about the farmers’ difficulties. In many cases farmers bought their land with their eves open at the toe-high price, and when they got into difficulties, nonfarmers wero expected to come to their aid.

Mr AVright added that, if a businessman asked for assistance, ho would be sent to a charitable institution. The Bill had staggered tho business community, which was wanting to know what the Government was going to do next. All the Bill' would do would be to keep up the artificial price of land.

Mr P. C. Webb asked what provision the Bill was going to make for the 50,000 farmers who were on the verge of bankruptcy, the 74,000 unemployed workers, and the 40,000 to 50,000 business-men who were in difficulties. . Mr A. Stuart said he could see nothing wrong with the budgetary system, as a man would be able to Jive comfortably. The farmer would have plenty of milk, butter and other foodstuffs and was much better off than the man in the city. He thought that farmers should be pleased to accept the budgetary system. He thought the slump would eventually do a great deal of good, as many farmers had gone on the land with insufficient capital. The Bill would go a long way to remedy the position. The debate was adjourned and the House rose at 11.30. Mortgage Corporation Bill AMENDMENTS PROPOSED BY LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL Per Press Association. WELLINGTON, Last Night. The Legislative Council met at 2.30 and adjourned immediately until 8 o’clock, when the Mortgage Corporation of New Zealand Bill was reported back from the Statues Revision Committee with amendments. The amendments provide that every holder of shares in the corporation, must make a statutory declaration that he or she is not the possessor of more than 5000 shares. Instead of two joint managing-directors, the committee suggests that there should be or.e managing-director and an assistant managing-director. The Bill as passed by the House provided that one of the shareholders’ directors, appointed in the first place by the Governor-General, should retire in 1938, the second in 1939 and the third in 1940, and the committee’s proposed amendment is that the retirement years should be 1937, 1938 and 1939 respectively. As the. Legislative Council has no mower to make amendments to clauses

of a Bill affecting the finances of the State, the committee has recommended that the total of the directors’ fees shall not exceed £2500, instead of £3OOO.

A further amendment suggested by the committee is that the associate directors appointed by the board of directors shall be appointed for a term not exceeding live years, but shall be eligible for reappointment. It is proposed also that the associate directors shall receive no remuneration.

The Bill as passed by the House laid down that moneys lent by the corporation shall be secured by way of a first mortgage on the land or of the interest in any such land with or without any other security as the board of directors may think lit, and the committee proposes that the power to lend on any other security except land should bo deleted from the legislation. In moving the second reading, Hon. R. Masters said the Bill represented a desire of the Government to stabilise the farmers’ mortgage system. The farmer was just as entitled to have the best conditions of the money market. Stabilised finance, based on correct land values and not inflated values, was more important than cheap money. It was desiraT?s that there should be cheap money, but after all, the value of money had a direct relationship to supply and demand. The Minister said the cost of a guaranteed price of Is 3d per pound for blitter would cost £10,951,000 on last year’s reports. ‘ The Council adjourned at 9.10.