The Southland Times. PUBLISHED EVERY MORNING. Luceo Non Uro. WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 5, 1930 WHICH IS RIGHT?

Southland Times, Issue 21000, 5 February 1930, Page 4

The Southland Times. PUBLISHED EVERY MORNING. Luceo Non Uro. WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 5, 1930 WHICH IS RIGHT?

If there is a surplus of houses in Auckland, and if the State Advances Department has had some houses, on which loans had been made, thrown back on its hands, some caution in handling further applications for loans must be considered advisable, but it is a peculiar fact that the announcement of the Department to grant no further loans on houses in Auckland until the situation improved received an emphatic denial from the Prime Minister’s office, in spite of the original statement in an official letter from the Department. The two documents contradict each other flatly, and it would seem that the Prime Minister’s office has been in rather a hurry to issue a denial of something which may be used for political criticism. The declaration issued in the name of Sir Joseph Ward finishes with the terse ’» The statement made in the Press that such loans are to cease is ridiculous. Much verbiage is expended on an explanation which covers the main facts of -the original Press Association message, without materially altering them, and then the affair is clinched in the sentence we have quoted. But by way of rejoinder a further Press Association message from Auckland shows that the original statement was based on a communication from the Department in reply to an applicant, and in it occurred the following: I would like to explain that the housing position in Auckland is not at present considered satisfactory, inasmuch as there are a good many empty houses to be found about the city. In the circumstances the members of the board don’t consider it advisable or expedient to grant any further loans for the building of more dwellinghouses just now in Auckland. As soon as the situation improves, and it is found that there are no unoccupied buildings in the city, and that further dwellings are required, your clients may renew' their applications, when the matter will receive further consideration. This explanation shows that the original message from Auckland was well founded, and that if the Prime Minister’s office declares the statement to be ridiculous it is making an open criticism of the State Advances Board; but the public can decide for itself which set of officials is nearer accuracy in interpreting the board’s mind.