The New Zealand Times. FRIDAY, OCTOBER 19, 1923. MIGRATION SCHEME

New Zealand Times, Volume L, Issue 11654, 19 October 1923, Page 4

The New Zealand Times. FRIDAY, OCTOBER 19, 1923. MIGRATION SCHEME

The official statement about the two important questions of migration and settlement, published yesterday, has come at an opportune moment. Just now the world of the overseas is discussing these questions with the interest due to their vital importance. In that discussion there is some criticism of New Zealand’s position as being not at all what it should be. The official statement is a defence against this criticism. Summarised, it means that New Zealand is doing very well; in fact, better than could bo expected, under all the circumstances which this country has to face. This well-doing is embodied in the great scheme of the soldier settlement, on which twentyseven millions have been spent, and in the immigration scheme which, devised for the introduction of 60,000 people, is working its way steadily along. Tho official view is that this attention to these two things is a very adequate fulfilment of a duty bounden and recognised in high quarters. There is a general view that this official statement of due performance contains much matter that is debatable. The soldier settlement must be recognised, of course, as an honest attempt to faithfully carry out all promises, definite and implied, to the men who went to the war, at great personal sacrifice. In this recognition there is, under the circumstances of the case, no need to refer again to the question of whether the right way or the wrong way was taken to redeem those promises. The way that was taken and is being pursued is a fact. We must accept it as a thing fixed and unalterable. The Government hopes that the scheme it has put into operation, and Parliament at its instigation has amended, will prove successful eventually. This hope is not a thing for the public to condemn. it may condemn tlio method, but it must at least admit the sincerity of all concerned. It is true that some parcels cf tho land acquired under the system were bought at high prices, and it is true that, soon after the start, the scheme was impeded by the unfortunate “slump” in prices of produce, which affected not the soldier alone, but all the producers of the Dominion, and brought the general public very near to panic. These evils were met by legislation last session, which all par-

ties vied with each other in making as good as possible. And, very fortunately. the recovery in the produce markets brought about a most beneficial change in the prospects of the soldier settlers, as well as of all the producers. These two tilings encourage tho hope that the soldier settlement scheme will work out to the success expected by its framers. In this hope the whole country joins; naturally, for there is nothing else to be done about it, ex cept to wish that the administration may he all that can he required, and that tho industry of the settlers will , be well directed, constant, and effective always. Things on the side of the con sinner are, it is needless to say, he yond any control from this country. The state of Europe, still far from recovery, is causing serious thought about the produce markets —whether they will or will not be supported at their present level. The large aggre gate of unemployment in Britain and elsewhere is an indication that the consumers may not be able to do all that is expected. On the other hand, the trade revival in Yorkshire, and the steady maintenance of the values of securities, seem to indicate that things are improving, not deteriorating. There 16, therefore, no reason as yet for serious fear for the ultimate success of the scheme of soldier settlement, though the possibility of a temporary setback cannot be ignored. But if we admit even the rapid success of the soldier settlement scheme, as a thing of unbroken course, will it he sufficient lo help the country forward as substantially as must be expected from a large comprehensive scheme of migration settlement? The soldier settlement scheme, when successful, will have ended ; but the need for settlement, more settlement, and still more settlement will go on. The scheme, if successful, will have done some good, but a good deal more will he wanted. Its effort, it will he found, will not have been sufficient for the whole big lift the burden on the shoulders of this country requires. !6 will help some way, but not all the way by a long way. Will the immigration scheme supply the strength for the rest of the lift? There is not much fault to find with the immigration scheme, 6o far as its purpose is concerned. But its purpose is not settlement alone. Settlement, on the contrary, occupies but a place on a list of many other objectives, as may be seen in the official statement. Some mistakes have been made in the working of this scheme, but it has been proved that by far the greater number of the immigrants have been absorbed, and it is true that those who suffered hardship at first have forgotten them. The official statement tells ns that no other oversea dominion has in the same time absorbed as many immigrants as this Dominion has. That is a source of satisfaction, of course, thouglf not a thing for flag-flying. But the essential point is that the scheme ; is not a settlement scheme. The best r that can be said for it is that it would j be a good adjunct to a settlement j scheme. Its addition to the general j population is but a dribble compared to the flqod of migration settlement we so urgently require. To the Imperial migration scheme, which i 6 intended to supply as mu-rh of this flood as New Zealand can comfortably take, the official statement made an important objection. According to this, none of the schemes devised in some of the oversea dominions for co-operation with the Empire scheme has a 6 yet done anything. The reason assigned is that the original estimates of cost have been on examination found very far too low—about one-fourth -of what the cost is now seen to be likely to be. This is, of course, a very serious allegation—even more, so far as New Zealand is concerned, than meets the eye. This because the land provided in the oversea co-operative schemes is very far below the value of any land that can be acquired in New Zealand. This does not apply to Crown lands, but in their case there is the cost of supplying transport facilities. It follows, then, if this allegation of over-low estimate is correct, that in the. case of private land any migration scheme on the plan of our neighbours’ schemes is likely to be even more costly than theirs, and to be as costly as theirs in the case of Crown lands. The degree is a negligible detail, for the lower cost is, according to the official allegation, quite impossible to face. This point requires examination, not acceptance on anybody’s word. If the allegation is sustained, after due inquiry and analysis, then the thing to do is not to drop the idea of a migration scheme, but to devise one on a better plan than those which have failed. The ■main thing to keep in mind is that a migration scheme must be found.