HOUSES AND LAND

New Zealand Times, Volume XLVIII, Issue 11007, 16 September 1921, Page 3

HOUSES AND LAND

ADVANCES TO SOLDIERS MINISTER DENIES MAXIMUM AMOUNT TO BE REDUCED. AN EXPLANATION. There appears (says the Christchurch “Sun”) to have been a reduction in the maximum amounts which may be granted by the Government by way of loan to returned soldiers for the construction or acquirement of dwellings. No official announcement has been made on the matter, hut in respect of the grants now being approved through the Canterbury Land Board reduction is apparent. Hitherto the maximum was £9OO for the building and £250 for the section. The maximum now appears to he £760 for the building and £IOO for the section. 1 The impression i@_ also apparent in some quarters, adds the “Sun,” that the granting of loans to returned soldiers by the present-methods will not be continued for many more months. Soldiers' may ’be given 6ome form of preference under the advances to settlers and to workers’ schemes. STATEMENT BY MINISTER NO REDUOTTOiT-MADE. The Hon. Df H. Guthrie (Minister for Lands and Repatriation) informed a “Times” representative . yesterday that his attention had been—drawn to the article in question, which referred to a reduction in the advances-made under the Discharged Soldiers’--Settle-ment Act for the purchase of'sections and for the erection of dwellings. The Minister started that the-maxi-mum amounts that may be-advanced for such purposes had not been reduced in any way. The regulations provided for £350 for the purchase*of "a section and £9OO for the erection of a dwelling- He . suggested that the _ article prfghfc refer to certain reductions which had recently been recommended to him by the Advisory Board in cases where it was considered that the amounts recommended by the Land Board were in excess of what was warranted, when the applicant’s income was taken into consideration. In such cases applicants were advised to modify then- proposals, both in their own interests and ml the interests of the State. In no case had a recommendation of the Land Board been reduced , where it was shown that the applicant was in a position to meet his obligations.