House Discusses Housing

Manawatu Times, Volume 70, Issue 189, 11 August 1945, Page 5

House Discusses Housing

Members Put Forward Many Suggestions

(Per Press Association.) WELLINGTON, August 10.

Housing improvement Avas the main topic of discussion in the House of Representatives this morning, the second reading of the Housing Improvement Bill being taken after a short period devoted to formal business, i The Minister of Housing Construction (Mr. .Semple) moving the second reading of the Bill, recalled that the measure had been introduced last year for circulation to local bodies. It had been sent to 292, and 40 had commented on it. Sixteen were in complete agreement Avith the measure, 20 had approved of it if Maori housing were excluded ,—and that had been done—four had disagreed, and it could be taken that the others Avere not opposed to it. Dealing with compensation for houses removed for improvement, he said there were houses built many years ago at a cost of five shillings a foot which Avere bringing in big rents because the people had nowhere else to go The point Avas that the owner would not get compensation on the rental \alue but on the salvage value, and Avhere none existed all that Avould be paid Avas the value of the land. This applied particularly to overcrowded slum areas, Avhich some city councils had Avished to deal with but had been unable to do so because they had no power*. The Bill corrected that position and gave the necessary authority for improvement.

Mr. W. Sullrvan (Bay of Plenty) said the Opposition agreed 100 per cent, with the principle of the Bill, Avhich paved the Avay for bringing sub-stand-ard houses up to a habitable standard, but they felt the Bill could be improved by some amendments. The Bill Avas before its time, but it was better in this case too soon than too late. If homes Avere to be pulled down it was, of course, essential that ncAv homes must be available to those obliged to move out. The only real solution for o\*ercroAvdiug Avas the pro\'ision of more and more homes, if possible, on a lower rental basis. Other points made by Mr. Sullivan Avere that one-half per cent, instead of one per cent, should be a suflieient charge by a local body upon an owner for administrative expenses, that it was impossible at present to require Avork to be carried out within 14 days when often tradesmen could not be obtained within 14 days even to look at a job, that local body by-laws should not be infringed by the State for the purpose of the Bill, that the Opposition had no time for “rack renters” who exploited the shortage of houses to obtain excessive rents, and that the temporary occupants of an obsolete dwelling should not be enabled to put the owner to considerable expense.. Discussing housing generally, Mr. Bullivau suggested that the Housing Department should accelerate its programme by having paths, fences, etc., completed by the building contractor instead of letting separate contracts for such work, that the Housing Department, by not paying permit fees, deprived local authorities in cities like Wellington of as much as £l3 per house, and that, the Department should consider the more extensive use of concrete, which would be economic if contractors had continuity of work enabling them to buy steel shuttering, which was initially expensive. Tho Under-Secretary of Housing (Mr. Meachen) said every effort aa-rs being made to get altcrnatiA'e materials for housing and experiments Avere being carried out Avith concrete that should produce results. Mr. Meachen said h?* was not in favour of building part of a house so as to give a temporary home, as had been suggested by some. He thought they would be better to explore the possibility of using transit camps, which he hoped would be very temporary, as homes for returned men. Mr. IT. T. Morton (Waitemnta) said

that Avhen the Government took office in I 1935, there was a shortage of 5000 or 6000 house.". The present shortage was between 70,000 ana 80,000. The position was tragic, and building costs to-day were the highest ever and probably the highest in the British Empire. Instead of overtaking the shortage we were falling further behind all the time. Mr. A. E. Armstrong (Napier) sail the figures quoted by Mr. Morton as to the housing shortage were quite misleading. People naturally sought Btate houses because of their superior amenities, but if this Bill could be effected 1100 per cent, probably two-thirds of tho applicants for Rtate houses would l<o satisfied with their present accommodation. | Ideas for improving housing in the Dominion Avere freely forthcoming in the House of Representatri’es this afternoon when the debate on the Housing Improvement Bill was continued, but I many of the suggestions made had previously been brought to the notice of the House. Mr. C. M. Bowden (Wellington West) said immense problcma would ariae in some urban areas where there Anas a progressive change from the residential to the industrial function of a locality, and it might be necessary to make subsidies available to local authorities to enable them to tackle the tasks which would confront them. In Wellington and elsewhere there had been reluctance to proceed with improvement projects owing to the acuteness of the present bousing shortage. It was necessary to tie up the purposes of this Bill with the expanded housing programme. Mr. Bowden said he welcomed the Bill as it gave local authorities what they did not previously have but he thought a poll of ratepayers might be advisable in some cases before major improvement works were commenced. The Bill would succeed only if it brought about the closest cooperation between the Government and the local authorities.

Mr. R. McKeen (Wellington South) dealt at length with the housing position in Wellington and Mr. W. S. Goosman (Waikato) criticised the policy of centralising so many Government Departments in the capital without adequate housing provision for State servants.

Hon. Walter Nash said Britain had made great progress with housing since he left there in 1909, but he did not think anywhere had sbowu better results than New Zealand. In Britain many people had been taken out of the slums but it had been found that the death rate increased after they were transferred because they had to pay so much more in rents that they went short of food. Through State rental houses and the State Advances Corporation the Go\ T ernment had made provision for 60 to 70 per cent, of the new houses in New Zealand and half of those would not have been built if it had not been for the Labour Government. Mr. Nash said it could be argued that a subsidy would assist housing but the GoA’ernment had arranged for adA-ances at 3 per cent, to returned servicemen and to local bodies for housing, and that was worth more than a subsidy of £2OO.

Mr. W. A. Bodkin (Central Otago) said the housing shortage would give rise to a great social evil if it were not controlled. The cost of housing had so risen that a worker in industry could not hope to build his own house even if he could get the money at 3 per cent. Interest and insurance alone would cost him £2 to £3 a Yet thousands of new* houses were needed before one board was torn off the condemned houses. Hon. W. E. Parry said all the members of the House had a responsibility to the men who had fought through the war and he did not want to listen to the House making political football of the housing difficulties which faced these men on their return to civilian life. Without a Bill of this kind it was impossible to tackle the slum problem and start to clean up areas which were an eyesore to the whole country. The debate was adjourned at 5.30 when the House rose until 7.30 on Tuesdav.