RIGHTS OF LANDOWNERS

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXX, Issue 21414, 11 February 1933, Page 10

RIGHTS OF LANDOWNERS

The obnoxious element, in the Small Farms Bill, to which attention was directed at the beginning of this week, has been withdrawn for further consideration. This is tantamount to an assurance that it will be amended. Th» administration of the scheme is to be entrusted to a board which, if it considers that land is not being adequately used, may take possession of it, awarding compensation at its own arbitrary valuation. The dispossessed owner may appeal on only two grounds, that the land is being used to a reasonable extent or that it is' necessary for the sustenance of his family. Neither question would be easily answered ; as the bill stands, the appeal must he made to a magistrate and his decision "shall be final." Fortunately, Mr. Coates realises the perils of such a limitation of civil rights. He cannot have forgotten that only four years ago, as leader of (he then Opposition, he conducted a valiant defence against an obstinate determination to establish exactly the same vicious doctrine in association with the notorious super tax on land. Yet, in spite of that successful demonstration for the maintenance of civil rights, a fresh attempt has been made to exclude administrative acts from review by the Courts. Mr. Coates has suggested that in this case, appeal to a Judge may be permitted. There are no legitimate reasons either for limiting the grounds of appeal or for preventing an aggrieved landowner from carrying his appeal, if necessary, to the highest tribunal in the Empire. The following clause of the bill, allowing mortgaged land to be acquired without reference to the mortgagee, also requires revision and amendment. Upon the plea of necessity, many encroachments have been made on private rights, but the greatest crisis does not warrant callous indifference to hardship and injustice to individuals, and the Government should be scrupulously careful to ensure that legitimate appeals sh.Tpll have access to impartial tribunals and not be condemned to the perils of decision by administrative officials, who neither pretend to judicial investigation and deliberation nor condescend to give reasons for their judgments.