GOVERNMENT AND THE LAND BILL

Otago Daily Times, Issue 14700, 7 December 1909, Page 4

GOVERNMENT AND THE LAND BILL

LEASEHOLDERS CONTINUE THEIR STONEWALL. MINISTER OF RAILWAYS SPEAKS. LAND FOR SETTLEMENT POLICY THROWN OVERBOARD. A STARTLING ANNOUNCEMENT. (Faou Our Owh Correspondent.) WELLINGTON, December 6. To-day there were rumours that there would he some surprising- developments in connection with the continued stonewall on the land question. It was suggested that some amendment would be moved that might put the Government in a tight coruer. It was even suggested that the Opposition might vote with the leaseholders and so turn the Government out of office. There was, of course, nothing ill the suggestion. The surprise of the day, however, came later with the speech of the Hon. Air Millar (Minister of Railways). From this it was apparent that the main feature of the land policy of the liberal administration of Mr liallance and Sir John M'Kenzie and Mr Scddon is to be thrown overboard by the present Liberal Government. 'I.u speech naturally created a great stir in the House, and when Mr Hanan was speaking subscsuently the Speaker had to intervene and ask member* to cease conversing so loudly. Mr T. E. Taylor, who took advantage of the amendment to speak a second time, delivered himself of. another fighting speech. During his remarks he asked what certain Radical members meant by standing by the Government in this change of policy? Mr Laurenson : What's the alternative?

Mr Taylor replied that the alternative might lie a change of Government, but he did not care a snap for a change of Government. A man's business was to be as honest in the House as he would bo outside. Jf the ltadical sentimi'iitof the House was true to its duty the Ministry would have to abandon the bill until the country was consulted. Mr Liiurcnson : Do you want to hold on to the land ? Mr Taylor: The Opposition could be no more tricky in regard to the national endowments than the Ministry of the day has shown by this bill that it can 1)0. Ho would sooner deal with an honest, thief—(laughter)—than with a man who would sandbag him from behind. The Opposition, he remarked, had always been open in regard to its attiitudo on the land question. He was not afraid of the Opposition coming into power, because lie believed the sentiment of the country was democratic. Who had fermented this cry for the freehold? Mr Latirenson (pointing to the Opposition) : It was fomented by that gang over | there. Mr Massey raised a point- of order, and The Speaker ruled that the word "gang" was most objectionable and must be withdrawn. Mr Laureii.son withdrew the expressm " Has it occurred to members that this is a continuous Ministry?" asked Mr Taylor. A& a youngster lie had admired the fight which Sir George Grey, Mr Ballance, and others made for the destruction of a contih'uous Ministry. " For 18 vears we have had a continuous Ministry in power," proceeded Mr Taylor, " and the Liberal party has never nominated a single member to a Cabinet during that time." When it became necessary for the. Cabinet to preserve itself it would act like the driver of a Russian sledge who was pursued . by wolves and who threw overboard first one child and then another, and finally his wife, so that- his own unworthy' skin might be safe and sound. In referring to the Hon. J. A'. Millar, Mr Taylor said, " I would say to the lion, gentleman that, if lie will leave that seat and come over here we can place a body of not six. but 20, members behind liin'i to see that the freehold is not given to the people bv ft bill like this." Mr Guthrie (Oroun) exolained his attitude in regard to what happened to the bill while it was before the Lands Committee. He was not present when the matter was first brought up, as lie had to leave Wellington to attend to some private business. On his return lie tound out what had been done, hut he knew nothing about it till he had returned. lie added that h 3 had not been asked by either one side or the other to give his vote in the committee, if the amendment, that the minutes of the committee lie laid on the table was carried it. would be seen who was responsible for the whole position. Mr Davpy : Did anyone communicate with you asking you to hurrv back again? Mr Guilirie replied that he had received no communication from one side or the other, but he added that- if the 'notion to put the freehold clauses back had been carried in committee by means of his vote he would be proud of the. fact, because he realised that the great majority of (he people of this country were in favour of the freehold. Otherwise they would never have sent 54 members to that Parliament to support it.—("Hear, hear.") T,et the leaseholders make an appeal to the country, and they would soon find out. where they were. _ Messrs Arnold jtiul Sidev both spoke m favour of the leasehold. ,'The tormer in the coureo ol his remarks twitted the Government with attempting to carry the bill with the assistance of the Opposition. If he said sarcastically the leaseholders or some of them voted with the Opposition, as they might do in a few days, it. would be regarded as a political' crime, but of course it was quite proper for the Goventmcnt- and Opposition to vote together. The Hon. J. A. Millar said that the Government had been accused of betrayal of the national right, but could any member show him any clause in the new bill where the power to lease was restricted? It had been said thatlie had departed from the leasehold principles, but the same rights were given with regard to the leasehold in the new hill as before. He had also been twitted with the question of what would he say to his constituents in regard to his change of opinions, He had not changed his opinion in the slightest. What did the country say at the last general olection ? The act passed two yew's ago laid down the principle that the option of the freehold was to be granted, and was not that the principle of the Liboral party? The principle, of the option of the freehold being given to Hie Crown tenants was endorsed by the people of the country at the last election, .ft. appeared to him that the country was proposed to be run for 4417 land-ior-setlcment tenants. For them the time of the country and the House was to be wasted day after day. The sooner this question was before the people and they had a fair understanding on it the better it would be. Some time before he had stated in the House that he was opposed to any further moiiey being bor'vowed for lands for settlement. They had spoken against the lea«e-in-perpe-tuity. They had stated that, it was abad thing and should be wiped out, and he did not think that there was one per cent, of those who were opiwSing the bill who did not want that teinire done awav with, but what was it to be replaced with? The leaso-m----perpetuity was terminable after a thousand years, but the renewable len.se was interminable. The million odd acres which had been acquired under the

Lands for Settlement Act were practically gone from (he State for ever and ever. The principle at the back of the leasehold was that tho uiKnvnctl increment should be the property of the Stale. That was provided for under the present bill.

A Member: Yott give it awav under this bill.

Mr Millar: You gel it under litis bill and to a greater extent. Mr Millar reviewed the provisions in the bill for periodical revaluations in support of his statement-. " I speak for nivf>?lf as a member of tho Cabinet/' Mr Millar said. " I don't know what the Cabinet will do; I am quite prepared to risk my life next week; I. am not afraid to go to the country on the matter." Six million pounds had been spent in witling 4417 people on the land, and it seemed that these people were going to dominate tho whole of the colony. He felt that the country would back the Government up in connection with its proposals. Mr Taylor: No. Mr Millar : I sa.y, yes. Mr Taylor: Why not test the question? Mr Millar, continuing, said the Government wanted to see whether there was a demand for the freehold. If the settlers did not take advantage of the provision in the <ict the land would remain leasehold for ever. Mr Taylor: That is a great resolution. Mr Millar: It is. Mr Taylor: But it will he abandoned as soon as there is a need for it. You will throw it overboard whenever you think if. advisable. Mr Milllar went on to say the nine million acres of national endowment land were intended to be kept as leasehold land for all lime. Mr Poole: Are yon sure? Mr Millar: As far as we are concerned. -

Mr Taylor : Until the pressure is sufficient to make you part with them. Mr Millar next remarked •that under the proposals it was intended to acquire Native land to the extent of half a million a year. Mr Rusfell : Will you ever give the freehold of that?

Mr Millar.; Only the back sections. Mr Taylor: We shall vee!

Mv Millar then declared that the criticism was not duo so much to a desire to retain the leasehold as to throw the country into a stato of chaos. The Liberal party had as a mat-tier of fact stuck to the leafeiiold system. It had introduced new proposals simply because no country could go on buying estates as New Zealand was doin£. every ce-tate purchased led (o the enhancement of the. value of the remaining private estates. It seemed to him that tho whole country wa-s going to be run for the cake of the Crown tenants. Whenever there was a snowstorm, who paid? Why, the Government. And the same thing happened when there was a flood, when tenants suffered hardship of any kind, when there was a bush fire. In view of this fact ho for one hesitated to contir.-e the old system. As time went on (.V; Crown tenants seemed Ifi become' a bigger factor in dominance of the country.

Members : Impossible! Air Ru.vell: They are running the country now.

Mr Millar: Here we are spending thousands of pounds in a debate on this question. He was not prepared to 150 on asking the people to put settlers on tho land at a cost of £1260 apiece, which was the average figure to date. Mr 'laylor: Is this the new Liberal policy?

Mr Millar: You should remember thatyou have peculiar ideas 011 Liberalism. Mr Russell: If that is the position, why don't you repeal the Land for Settlements Act.?

Mr Millar declared that nowadays as soon as a settler found his feet lie began to clamour for U straight-out freehold. The people who opposed, the demand were tho city representatives, and he was one of them. Practically all the country members supported the settlers in their claim. The only way to retain, leasehold land for those who wanted to get on the land was by tho means proposal in the bill. Despite its efforts in this direction.

tho Government believed it was only a matter of time when the freehold would be given. There wis no fairer system than that which iras proposal in the bill —viz.j that tho enhanced value of the properties due to expenditure on public works should go back at periodical terms f#r tho benefit of the State. Mr Witty: Will they be content? Mr Millar added : " i know we are making a new departure in regard to policy. It is a policy of greater advantage to tho Crown than the old system. When we come.to the Land Bill I will be prepared to debate it further." Mr Hanan said the House had not been called upon to consider a more important statement than was now before it for the last IS or 18 years. They were proposing to alter the whole 'land policy of the Liberal party, a policy of which the Dominion had been .so proud. According to the Minister of Railways, the whole land for settlement policy of the Government was now to stop. Mr Itussell: Thai's what it amounts to. Mr Taylor: Yes, that's it. Mr Hanan went on to twit Mr Millar with not having declared such a policy when before his constituents.

Mr Millar interjected that ho had moi tioned it in the House, and his constKi ents knew his views.

Mr Tlanan said lie had not made sue a decided declaration.

Mr Millar replied that he bad clearly stated that the country could not go on borrowing money for lands for settlement. Mr Hanan continued his speech on lines strongly favouring the leasehold principle, which, he maintained, was a sound one. " What," asked Mr Hanan towards the dose of his speech, "did the early settlers come out- from England and Scotland for?"

The Hon. Thomas Mackenzie (cuiphati-

tally): To get the freehold; Mr Hanan went on to discus.? the question in regard to other countries, and refered to Ireland.

The Hon. Thomas Mackenzie: The leasehold won't settle Ireland.

Mr Hanan, in an impassioned manner, went on to declare against the present decision of the Uovernnient. lie baJieved that when the people understood the positon they or their children or their children's children would make someone pay for it, and t bat they wcukl say: "Cursed, be those land laws that were passed in 1907, 1908, or 1909." He considered they would be politcal cowards and political backsliders—("Hear, hear") —if they sanctioned what was proposed now. So Minister should ask any meml>er to do anything that would make him lose self-respect in the eyes of his constituents.—)" Hear, hear.") _ At 5.30 the debate was interrupted by the usual intimation from the Speaker: " Sorry to interrupt the lion, gentleman; lie can continue his speech to-morrow afternoon." A POLITICAL PUZZLE.

It is certainly .t vwv difficult matter to state or even to surmise what is the Government's land policy nowadays. There arc members of the party who frankly don't know where they are, and it camiot. be surprising if outsiders are somewhat puzzled. In a little over ffivo hours from the time when one member of the Cabinet (Mv Miliar) was condemning borrowing for land for settlements another member of the Cabinet (the Prime Minister) was proposing the second reading of the Land for Settlement® Administration Bill, which • empowers the Government to borrow one million sterling per annum for lane! for settlement.

When Mr Massey was speaking on the bill he expressed surprise at. its appearance after tlie speech they had heard that afternoon from the Minister of Railways.

It is" a rule ot the Ilou«* that no member can refer to a past debate of tho current) session, and Mr Massey was promptly interrupted by Mr Millar with the cry'of "past debate." Mr Massev laughingly replied that itwas quite evident that the lion, gentleman's conscience was not at rc»t.

" Past debate, Mr Speaker," cried another member on the Government side of the House.

Mr Massey, resuming. said hon. members understood from the speech referrcd to that it was intended to put an end to tilts land for settlement system because it was held to be too costly.

■Mr Ell (rising in his place) : A point of order. Sir.

Mr .Miissey: \ou did not- stop me soon enough, for I have said all- I want to on the subject just now.

The Speaker: You must not refer to a past debate.

Mr Maesev : It is quite evident that the speech of which t-ho hon. gentleman is thinking has created consternation in the Government camp. I would advise Ministers to reconcile their differences in the Cabinet-room. Mr Millar: There is no conflict, Mr Masssey : You say 110 conflict, but I heard ono of the Ministers say— The Speaker: You are out of order now. Mr Massey proceeded with his criticism of the bill. Mr Russell, a- leasehold member of the Government- party, who followed Mr Maesey, also began to refer to the statement made by Mr Millar this afternoon, but he was promptly checked on a point of ordeT raised by the Prime Minister. Mr Russell, in replying to an interjection by the Hon. T. Mackenzie, said that- the Minister of Agriculture had turned a complete somersault, and having landed 011 his feet in the Ministry had upset the leasehold policy of the Government, ANOTHER AMENDMENT. It is understood that Mr Rufsell (Avon) will move an amendment traversing the Government's land policy as soon as the present amendment (moved by Mr Hevrics) has been put out of tire way. A GOVERNMENT CAUCUS. A caucus of the Government party will be hold to-morrow morning, when an exort will be made to " round up " the members of the party who have recently been giving trouble. If the leaseholders attend there should be rather a. lively discussion, especially in view of Mr Millar's speech to-day " LANDS COMMITTEE MEETINGS. WHAT TOOK PLACE THERE. (Faou Our Own Couhesvoxdext.) WELLINGTON, December 6. 111 the course 'of his. speech this afternoon, Mr Arnold pointed out that the 10 members of the Lands Committee consisted of five freeholders and five leaseholder*. He understood that at the first meeting of the committee (from which Mr Guthrie was absent) certain clanscs of the Land Bill wire struck out by five to four, the freeholders, in the absence of the member for Oroua, bciiw in a minority of one. The matter, lie believed, -was reconsidered at another meeting, at which there was a full attendance, ami the clauses that- had been previously struck out were then, ho was informed, reinstate.;! by six to four. According to the division at the previous meeting, the voting should have been five and five, leaving the matter to be decided by the chairman's casting vote. Instead of this, however, one of the leasehold members, who had voted at tho first meeting to strike out the clauses, had at the second meeting supported their reinstatement. It is understood that the member to whom .Mr Arnold referred is Mr Lawry, member for Parnell.

THE LEASEHOLD CAMPAIGN. IFroji Oca Owx Cohresposdest.) WELLINGTON, December 6. As already stated, the leaseholders propose carrying on an active platform campaign in -both town and country in opposition to the Land Bill. A 6tart will be made at Hastings on Friday next, wlmre a public meeting will be addressed in response to an invitation from a number of Crown tenants. The speakers will be . Messrs Avnokl, Hanait, M'Laroi, M.P.'s, and the Hon. J. T. Paul, M.L.C,