Heated Discussion On Walsh’s Farm Activities

Northern Advocate, 23 August 1945, Page 4

Heated Discussion On Walsh’s Farm Activities

(Special) WELLINGTON, This Day. The farming activities of Mr F. P. Walsh, president of the New Zealand Seamen's Union and a member of the Stabilisation Commission, were the centre of a heated hour in the House of Representatives yesterday. Before the storch subsided the Prime Minister (Hon. P. Fraser), the Minister for Lands (Hon. C. F. Skinner) and three Opposition members had spoken. Mr W. A. Sheat (Oppn., Patea) had asked a question referring to the undue aggregation of land. Mr Sheat had' quoted a case which had been declined by the Wellington Land Sales Committee where the applicant already owned a farm of 220 acres and had asked permission to purchase another property of 148 acres. When he asked the question Mr Sheat had added that the applicant was Mr Finton Patrick Walsh. Mr Skinner, in a written answer, said that land sales committees gave full consideration to the question of undue aggregation when dealing with applications for consent to transactions where persons already owning land sought to acquire further land. They were bound to do so under the Act.

The Prime Minister said that the name of the individual concerned had been deleted from the note to the question on the supplementary order paper, but in view of the publicity given the matter when the question v/as asked members should have the right to refer to the name. The House agreed to this course. Framing of Question Mr Skinner, supplementing his written reply, said that Mr Shear knew that the Minister of Lands had no right to interfere with land sales committees at all The question was framed to give publicity to a particular transaction which ' was selected from thousands going through the land sales committee. At the time Mr Walsh was negotiating the sale of his existing property in the Wairarapa to a returned serviceman and that sale had since been completed subject to the committee’s approval. Had this sale not been delayed there would have been no suggestion of aggregation by Mr Walsh, and Mr Sheat knew that perfectly well. Mr Skinner added that in any case a number of members of the Opposition owned more than one farm. The '.reference to Mr Walsh had been grossly unfair and showed a lack of sense of proportion on the part of the member who asked the - question. Mr Sheat: Tell us the full facts about the Wairarapa property. Mr Skinner: That does not concern this House.The Minister added that Mr Walsh in endeavouring to arrange the purchase ot the second property had been acting for relatives. The property concerned was unsuitable for returned men. Mr Sheat: I object to the suggestion that I asked this question from any ulterior motive. (Government laughter). If a man of wealth, whether he was a trade union secretary or anyone else, wanted to invest his surplus money to develop land, thereby helping production, it was a serious thing' that he should be refused the opportunity to do so, said Mr Sheat. Taumarnnui Houses

The Minister 'had represented Mr Walsh as a magnanimous, patriotic citizen, but was it not a fact that he had failed to comply with ihc terms on which he bought his Wairarapa farm? Was it not a Lands for Settlement property, obliging the owner to live on it? Had not Mr Walsh, with a connivance of the Lands Board and the Minister for Lands, failed to comply with this condition since he bought the farm four years ago? Was he not farming it as an absentee landlord through sharemilkevs? Mr. Sheat said that Mr. Walsh had disclosed to the land sales committee that he owned houses in Taumarnnui and that he proposed to sell them, but failed to indicate that he was negotiating the sale of the Wairarapa farm, as the Minister now related. Mr. F. W. Doidge (Oppn., Tauranga): Who is Mr. Walsh? Mr. Sheat: He is one of the “Big Three" of the Federation of Labour. Mr. Sheat added that if it had been disclosed to the committee that Mr. Walsh was acting' on behalf of members of his family the committee’s rejection on the ground of attempted aggregation was wrong. Mr. Fraser said the matter was something new in his experience of tin- House —it was the first time the business affairs of a citizen outside the House had been discussed. Mr Walsh was not an executive officer of the Federation of Labour, but he had been for many years the efficient president of the Seamen’s Union. He had been a member of the Stabilisation Commission, and had worked night and day without a penny reward in his successful endeavours to preserve the industrial peace in the Dominion during the war. No Justification When lying on what might have been his deathbed he had directed the patriotic art union with great success. He had lived on the Wairarapa farm until his duties as a member of the Stabilisation Commission, and then his illness, had prevented his doing so. Jn negotiating for the second property. Mr. Fraser continued, Mr. Walsh acted on behalf of his sister, and when the investment company which was financing the proposition asked him for security purposes to take some interest in the farm tie took one-sixth share in it. There was no justification for a member asking such questions unless he wished to become an expert in personal attacks on citizens outside the House. . Mr. W J. Poison (Oppn.. Stratford) said he was interested in the Prime Minister’s extraordinary anger when any reference was made to"a leader o£ the Labour movement. „ . Mr. Fraser: It is when I see anything contemptible. Mr. Poison said there had been numerous occasions when a Minister had attacked persons outside the House who could not reply. If names wore not to be mentioned in the House, Ministers also should observe the rule. The House then passed cn to the next business.