COMPENSATION SOUGHT

Southland Times, Issue 23376, 7 December 1937, Page 8

COMPENSATION SOUGHT

ROYALTY FOR OWNERS OF LAND CONTROL OF RESOURCES NOT OPPOSED (From Our Parliamentary Reporter) WELLINGTON, December 6. “There is no objection to the Crown assuming control of all our natural oil resources but at the same time I see no reason why reasonable compensation should not be paid to persons on whose land oil is found,” said the Rt. Hon. J. G. Coates (Nat., Kaipara) during the debate on the Petroleum Bill in the House of Representatives tonight. “I believe the Minister of Mines (the Hon. P. C. Webb) should receive our approbation for the manner in which he has tackled the position,” Mr Coates said, “although I think he feels in his heart of hearts that while there are certain principles he is transgressing that is justified by the importance of the wider issue. There is no objection to the Crown assuming full control of our oil resources, but in that procedure there are certain difficulties. I have no hesitation in saying that the time has arrived when we should have the matter decided and there are some of us on the Opposition side of the House who are sacrificing quite a lot in supporting the Minister up to a point.” The Government had pointed to legislation passed in Great Britain as justification for the present measure, Mr Coates continued, but the two cases were not analogous. There was no native race in Great Britain but there was one in New Zealand, and by the Treaty of Waitangi the Maoris had been accorded certain rights which the Bill would take away from them. Before the Native Affairs Committee Maori witnesses had stated that in their, own language. Such as the Bill proposed must be made over their dead bodies. Mr J. Thorn (Lab., Thames): That is an exaggeration.

Mr Webb: The interpreter did not say that. Mr Coates: In my opinion the Treaty of Waitangi hands over to the Maoris complete and absolute right to the land and everything beneath it. Discussing the position of European land owners, Mr Coates said that where a man held the fee simple to his land, the Government had no right to take away his right to any minerals that might be found under it. To do so would be definite encroachment on the principle of fee simple. There should at least be payment on the basis of the amount of petroleum that might be won from a man’s property and this might well take the form of half the royalty of at least five per cent., which the Government intended to impose. Members of the Government had contended that as oil was migratory it was not possible to establish who should receive payment, but the question was where the dome was. That was the principle that had been followed in every other country where oil had been found.

The Minister of Public Works (the Hon. R. Semple): You might pay the wrong man.

Mr Coates: Well, let the right man prove his case. Mr Webb: That is what they have been trying to do in other countries for 20 years. “There is no obstacle,” Mr Coates concluded, “to the Crown agreeing that at least part of the five per cent, royalty should go to the owners of the land.”