Untitled

Southland Times, Issue 19367, 18 August 1904, Page 3

LAND BOARDS,

A lone discussion— a stonewall in factwas raised by Sir W. STEWARD'S measure providing- for the election oJ Land 'Boards. In moving the sec-Olid reading, Sir William explained that under the bill boards would consist of six persons, viz., the Commissioner, two members nominated by the Government, and three elected by those bn tho Parliamentary roll for the district. The MINISTER of RAILWAYS said that the bill proposed an important reform. It was a matter for consideration whether complaints against land administration should always lie .placed on the members of Boards. Some of the hoards were good and some indifferent. He favoured 'some alterations in the constitution, but doubted whether it should be initiated by a private member. The time was inopportune for the proposal. In view of Ule commission on the land question which was to. be set upon, the bill should be suspended until the report oi the cummisaion was available. Mr MASSEY thought it a pity that the Minister for Lands had not expressed Wsjopinjon; instead of leaving it to hiß colleagues. Persons were appointed to land boards for political services rendered. A change was desirable in the interests of Crown tenants themselves, and the elective principle was generally approved. The Government "should bring down a bill si vIn S Crown tenants representation. He v hoped that tlie Mouse [would not agree to await the recommendation of the .Commission.

The MINISTER of LANDS contended that Crown tenants were represented on the latid boards. Most of the complaints were because the board insisted on the land' laWs being observed ; bona fide settlers^ and farmers gave little trouble. The Minister contended tjhat the measure was a h>i)Hd one- Either the present system should bo continued or it should 1 se suspended altogether by elective boards pure and simple. .

Sir W. RUSSELL objected to the bill under which the Corapiisstoner, and two members nominated by the Crown would have, the: same power as the three members eieptetl by an enormously large electbrWte.''^btti'd;^eiittbera/.be."fouuid.'.'to canvaß» such large electtorates for such small honours ?- /the- result of the elective system would 1 be to focua the wh'ote powers of land administration in the town voters. ■': . . ;.- . ..'■'' . . .;.. .; ■■ ''■'•

Hon; C. H. MILLS aefended tnV land boards. The expense involved in an election would not be warranted by the work devolving on members" of land boards." '■.-■ . .'; .' ■•,;.;• .■■'■••■'.• ..■'.; ••■..■•-.

Mr J. C; THOMSON supported tEe elective principle, but found points of objection in the bill. The lassitude affown in"

regard to public affairs made it probable that the majority of those interested in land administration would not be represented on the boards. The Government should have brought in a bill dealing with this subject, as there was great dissatisfaction with tho conduct of land matters. The debate dragged on all 'the evening and just before 2 a.m., the second reading was carried by 27 to 13.