BAN ON SPECULATION

Otago Daily Times, Issue 25302, 12 August 1943, Page 4

BAN ON SPECULATION

REPLY TO MR HOLLAND (F.0.P.R.) WELLINGTON, Aug. 11. " The speech of the Leader of the Opposition was a very good one in support of the old order of speculation and booms and slumps,” said Mr F. W. Schramm (Govt., Auckland East), who followed Mr Holland in the debate on the Servicemen’s Settlement and Land Sales Bill in the House of Representatives tonight. Referring to Mr Holland’s criticism that the Bill imposed further controls on the community, Mr Schramm asked whether the Leader of the Opposition was aware that under the Government of Mr Churchill in Britain there was greater control of business than in New Zealand.

Replying to Mr Holland’s charge that the measure contained no machinery for the settlement and financing of returned men on the land, Mr Schramm said that these matters were covered by other legislation already on the Statute Book. ’’ If any member on the Opposition - side believes that the speculative buying or selling of land should be permitted, let him say so,” said Mr Schramm, who asked whether Mr Holland would suggest that the ordinary law courts of the country should be handed over to private enterprise. Why should the Leader of the Opposition condemn the State, which was the only authority which could prevent the speculative and uneconomic buying and selling of land? asked Mr Schramm. The Bill was designed to protect the citizens of New Zealand generally. Would anyone try to say that speculation and exploitation did not exist in New Zealand to-day? The success of the Bill, Mr Schramm said, would depend on the constitution of the land sales committees and the court whose personnel would be chosen for their standing in the community and their ability. If anyone imagined there was no right of appeal against the decision of the land sales committees, he had not read the Bill. The judge would represent the owners on the court just as a Supreme Court judge did when he sat on cases that came before him individually. There was no analogy in regard to the compensation courts, where the individual owners could appoint an assessor. He believed that most of the transactions would be merely routine in coming before the committees, and only a few would have to go to the court. Mr W. J. Poison (Oppn., Stratford) questioned whether the Bill would achieve its object of preventing speculation. In settling returned servicemen the Government should work in conjunction with the farming community, whose knowledge of special conditions and

values would be of great assistance. No one would suggest that the soldier should pay more for land than its productive value. At the same time the formula provided for in the Bill was outrageous and would not work out as the Government intended. If the land sales committees did not disregard the formula, the State would find itself paying more in certain cases than the land was worth. It was not a practical formula. The Prime Minister, Mr Fraser: Will you in the committee stage make suggestions about the formula? Mr Poison: I will be glad to do so. Tlie debate was interrupted by the adjournment at 10.30.