IMMIGRANTS AND LAND.

New Zealand Herald, Volume LX, Issue 18324, 14 February 1923, Page 11

IMMIGRANTS AND LAND.

SCHEME FOR SETTLEMENT. BURDEN OF TAXATION. QUESTION OF V EXEMPTION. Matters relating to the scheme of immigration advocated by ':'■; the New Zealand Immigration and Land Settlement League were discussed by the provincial executive of the Farmers' Union last evening. ' ,'■ ■ ' The chairman, Mr. R.D. Duxfield, reI ported that . a deputation representing | the league had interviewed the standing committee and requested assistance in J urging certain matters on the Govern- ■ ment with the object of encouraging immigration and land settlement. It was suggested that where blocks of land were being held for the encouragement of immigration and ■ closer settlement, they should be exempt from land tax, | while an approved amount of capital is being annually expended for develop- [ ment, and . that during such period j local - rates remain stationary. A further suggestion was that a complete revision be made of the system of levying taxation on the profits derived from the sale of land. The chairman said that some action was necessary to facilitate the objects of the league. This country had a farmer as Prime Minister, and the Government was supposed to be concerned for the interests of the farmers. As a matter of fact, the Dominion was turning away a class of immigrant who were going to Australia under conditions provided by a Labour Government. The position was largely due to excessive taxation. Much of the land remaining . for settlement could never be settled by small farmers without a generous measure of assistance. It was recognised that the class of land it was desired to settle presented certain problems that could only be solved by the expenditure of a good deal of capital. The Government would not carry out such a scheme. The British Parliament had voted a large amount of money to assist in settling emigrants in the overseas Dominions. Practically all the countries within the Empire had availed themselves of the scheme with the exception of New Zealand. Mr. A. A. Ross said it was absolutely essential that New Zealand should have increased settlement to carry the great burden of taxation. Only ', by adopting a scheme of immigration and settling land m blocks could this be accomplished. The Imperial scheme could be carried out notwithstanding the adoption of any private venture. Mr. J. Garton' said that if the league took up land for the express purpose of settling immigrants on it, he would support the proposals. If the land was to be taken up for speculation it would le a different matter altogether. / Mr. IJ. Trewin said he considered schemes of the nature proposed should be carried out by the Government and ample financial provision should be made for the settlers. - Mr. C. K. Wilson expressed similar views to the previous speaker. In no country except perhaps Denmark had so many settlers succeeded as in New Zealand. He was strongly in favour of a progressive settlement policy to provide for immigration, but he was opposed •to syndicates carrying out such a scheme. The farmers themselves were the culprits in regard to the existing nature of things. They mostly had too much land and could afford to part with some of it in the interests of immigration. The chairman, in reply, said the proposals were necessary for the development of the Auckland district in particular. Capital would not be provided for the development of farming land as long as the present system of taxation existed. As soon as a company such as was proposed placed any land tn the market the receipts would be regarded as income and they would be taxed accordingly. In the circumstances, such taxation would be quite inequitable as the company would only be getting back money that had been expended •in developing the land for settlement., - It was decided to support both suggestions. • p