NATIVE LAND PURCHASE

New Zealand Times, Volume XLVII, Issue 10850, 16 March 1921, Page 6

NATIVE LAND PURCHASE

STRONG CONDEMNATION WASTEFUL, METHODS AND IMPROVIDENT ADMINISTRATION. LOSSES AT DREW ERA. Mr E. C. Sim, ex-Judge of the Native Land Court, writes to the editor of the “New Zealand Times" as follows: Sir, —The present position of the Goveminent purchase;? of Maoii lands in th« Lrewera district throws a strong light on the methods of administration of native affairs. The purchases were commenced about 1910, or earlier; up to 1912 about =£40,000 had been paid in purchase money. Ever since, purchasing has gone on steadily, until, at the present time, the Government has acquireil the right to 300,000 acres of land, at a cost, in cash paid for the land, of, I believe, about =£200,000. The purchases have taken over .ten years; the money paid, out has earned no interest, and the land purchased has produced nothing. Computing simple interest at 5 per cent, on an average expenditure of =£2o,000 a year for ten years, the loss by way of interest alone amounts to =£55,000. Yet even now the Government has not a single acre to which it can give a title, of on which a settler can place his foot.’ It is now proposed by Mr Ngata to allow another year to arrange a division between the Crown and the nonsellers; this would mean the loss by way of interest of another =£10,000; and there is no certainty that twelve months would see the end of the trouble and the loss. Until the areas acquired by the Crown have been actually defined either by arrangement or by the court, no steps whatever can bo taken to survey them, to subdivide and road them, and to place them on the market. It may be two years before a single section can be offered for selection; all the while the loes continuing and accumulating The Government will then find itself on the horns of a dilemma. Will the loss of interest he recouped from, tlie settler by raising the price of the land, or will it remain a loss by falling on the shoulders of the heavily-burdened taxpayer? In either case the Government will be penalising somebody for its own misdeeds. "SYSTEM AN OUTRAGE!.” It is quite evident that the system on which the land was purchased is an outrage on the elementary rules of successful business. Yet the Government had to its hand a system which, with slightly extended operation and business-like application, would have met all demands. The difference would have been that negotiations and arrangements would precede and not follow expenditure; interest would not be lost on the money, expenses would he greatly reduced, and much time would be saved. There would have been avoided this-shameful delay in opening up the land for settlement, and this sinful waste of public money. It seems absurd in .these days that in order to acquire this land for State purposes the Government should he obliged to get 10,000 signatures and make 10.000 payments, only to find in the end that much more is required to be done before the Crown, areas can even be located and defined. ' "THE INDIAN SIGN.” There are many other matters relating to the administration of native affairs which should receive very careful attention. The Hon. Sir William Herries, capable as be was, bad fallen under the “Irdian sign,” and seemed powerless to resist the influences which surrounded him. He was handicapped by the loss of some of the old and experienced officers of the Native Department; he was too often obliged to rely upon the advice of interested jiarties; and he was too easily deterred by the fear of Maori opposition. In later yea I‘.l he leaned heavily upon tli»> Hon. A. T. Ngata, who is by no means a safe guile for a Native Minister, end to whom power without lesponsibility gave opportunities, which, as a Maori, lie found himself unable to neglect. ENORMOUS LOSSES. This matter of Government administration is quite as important as Government legislation, but it receives neither care nor scrutiny. Tho amount of money that is practically thrown away from the State point of view must be very great. It has been suggested that it is not overstating the case to say that out of every five millions expended about one million is lost to tlie State by inexcusably wasteful methods and improvident administration. Tlie Government constantly preaches economy, but makes not a whit of difference in its practice. Government departments were specially created to inform and advise Ministers, but nowadays nothing of consequence can he attempted without a costly and too often futile Commission. All problems are solved by dipping into the consolidated funds—an easy solution while the funds last.

The time and effort spent in passing bad laws, some of them so opposed to the general sense and feeling of the community that reputable citizens have no compunction about disobeying them, would be well employed ill reorganising tlie methods of administration, and devising means to ensure that the State shall obtain something near value for the money it spends.