THE LAND QUESTION

New Zealand Times, Volume XXX, Issue 6678, 28 November 1908, Page 9

THE LAND QUESTION

HOW THE NEW HOUSE STANDS. The constitution of the new Parliament, viewed from a land reformer’s standpoint, does not appear unite so favourable as the previous House of Representatives. Various attempts have been made to analyse the position, hut the result gives an extremely uncertain deduction. In tho old House, when it was moved that all Crown lands should be disposed of under the optional principle, tho twenty "ayes" included five members of tho present Ministerial majority—Messrs Greenslado, T. Mackenzie, Jennings, Remington, and Ross—while another motion to bring the national endowment lands under the optional principle brought a further accession to Opposition ranks in the persons of Messrs Wilford, Baume, and Field. Mr J. C. Thomson, another Government supporter, was found in the same lobby as the Leader of the Opposition when it came to proposing that holders of the renewable lease should have tho right of converting to freehold during the first term. Possibly Mr J. Duncan (Wairau), classed as an Independent, would vote “freehold” on a division, but none of the new Liberal members are out-and-out freeholders. Mr J. Vigor Brown, who replaces Mr A. L. D. Fraser, a freehold supporter of the Government, declared during his campaign that he believed in both freehold and leasehold. Mr T. B. Taylor will fight in tho ranks of tho leaseholders. When there was a division upon the third reading of the Land Laws Amendment Bill, only three Government supporters (Messrs Greenslade, Jennings, and Ross) voted against it. Twonty-fivo Oppositionists are included in the now Parliament, but oven if, as the “Evening Post” suggosts, they could secure the adhesion of Mr Duncan and the nine Government supporters on a motion, discreetly worded, declaring “no-confi-donco” in tho Ministry’s land policy, they would still bo in a minority if the division was made an absolute trial of strength.

A LEbVSEHOLDKa’S OPINION.

“NOT A BURNING QUESTION.”

Mr A. W. Hogg) whose leasehold opinions aro so well known, is again a member of Parliament, and his elec* tioneering experience leads him to believe that the land question is not a burning one. The inevitable election query which faced him before tho passing of the Land Bill —whether settlers should bo allowed to convert their leaseholds into freeholds—only cropped up on one or two occasions during the late campaign. Tho Land Bill scorned to bo giving general satisfaction, because its effect had been to facilitate tho breaking up of large estates. Where a change seemed to bo required by tho people was in the graduated land tax, which could be applied to estates of £20,000 instead of starting at an unimproved value of £4o*ooo*