LOANS FOR HOTEL

Northern Advocate, 28 October 1932, Page 6

LOANS FOR HOTEL

STATE’S ACTION ASSAILED

AHGOROUS PROTESTS,

(From Our Parliamentary Special.)

WELLINGTON, Thursday.

' ■The action of State departments in lending money for the construction of the Masonic Hotel at Napier was criticised: by Mr C. A. Wilkinson in the House last night.

Mr Wilkinson said the State Advances Department had been established for the purpose of assisting settlors, but there was not a settler in the country who could get a penny out of the institution at the present time. Nevertheless, the department had lent £21,000 on first mortgage for the construction of the Masonic Hotel at Napier. On second mortgage the Public Trust had advanced £15,000, in spite of the fact that settlers *were unable to obtain assistance from that department and would be sued if their payments were in arrears. There waa no doubt that the taxpayers of the Dominion would rcseut the action of the Unemployment Board in taking up a third mortgage at £B,OOO, The total amount advanced by three departments had been £44,000,- or £2)000 more than the contract price. It was time members of the House voiced their protest against the expenditure of public money in that way. The whole thing was wrong, and should never have happened. Not long ago the Government had had to find a guarantee of £60,000 as the result of tho failure of the Chateau, Tongariro, and that should have been a lesson.

Another protest against the action of the Unemployment Board in advancing £B,OOO on third mortgage for the reconstruction of the Masonic Hotel was made by Mr D, McDougall (Government —Mataura), who said no member of the House would risk a third mortgage on a Napier hotel. He w T as surprisedthat Mr W. E. Barnard (Labour —Napier) had endorsed the action of the Unemployment Board in spending its money in that manner. Apparently Mr Barnard supported the policy of taking a shilling from the charwoman who cleaned out Parliament Buildings in order to build an hotel. The action of the board meant that a public house was being built out of the wages of the workers. "If it came to a question of voting for Prohibition/' said Mr McDougall, "Mr Hamilton, the chairman of the board, and Mr McCombs, -who are l on the waiter waggon' would tell the people to strike out the top line and drive the drink traffic away, but they will support this kind of thing."