LAND FOR SETTLEMENT

Otago Daily Times, Issue 27388, 13 May 1950, Page 6

LAND FOR SETTLEMENT

Acquisition By Voluntary Negotiation

GOVERNMENT'S POLICY PA WELLINGTON, May 12. “The Government has given very careful consideration to the acquisition of land for the settlement of returned servicemen, and to the criticism that has been manifest in some quarters,” said the Minister of Lands, Mr Corbett, in a statement tonight. “The Lands Department is searching for land suitable for purchase for settlement purposes, and in all districts letters have been sent to farmers inquiring whether departmental officers may inspect their properties with a view to ascertaining: First, whether their farms are suitable for the purpose; and, secondly, whether the owner is willing to sell all or portion of his land.

“It has come to the Government’s notice that these letters have been interpreted as a first step toward the owner losing his farm by compulsory acquisition by the State, and have occasioned some concern. With a view to reassuring farmers, I wish to state clearly the Government’s policy for land settlement. We wish to acquire suitable land for settlement by voluntary negotiation between the owners and the Government. It is only in an extreme case where any of the compulsory provisions of the law will be employed; cases where far more land is held than can be justified, and where owners refuse to negotiate.

“The price at which the land will be bought will be its present-day value, and the soldier will be settled at the 1942 valuation, the difference to be borne by the State. “ It is not the policy of the Government to acquire by compulsion fullyimproved single-unit farms merely to replace one farmer with another. This statement of Government policy should clear the matter up. There has been a change of Government and of policy. While section 51 still operates, the unfettered right of withdrawal from sale is permissible if the price sought is not con._rmed by the Land Valuation Committee.

“Under part 11, that is, where.acquisition has been recommended by the Land Settlement Board, very much wider consideration is now given to family responsibilities and the right of the farmer to provide an economic retention area for each member of his family, in addition to safeguarding his own livelihood. “In the interests of land settlement and rehabilitation, I wish to appeal to land owners to offer suitable areas to the Government so that returned servicemen and others can have made available to them their promised opportunity on the land.”