The Southland Times TUESDAY, JULY 29, 1941. Slum Clearance in New Zealand

Southland Times, Issue 24499, 29 July 1941, Page 4

The Southland Times TUESDAY, JULY 29, 1941. Slum Clearance in New Zealand

WHAT were described as “farreaching” proposals for slum clearance in New Zealand are to be embodied in a Bill now in the hands of the law draughtsman. The Minister of Housing, who outlined the scope of the Bill in a statement printed yesterday, explained that the Act will not be brought into operation straight away. Although he emphasized the need for slum clearance, Mr Armstrong was more cautious than is usually the case with Government spokesmen when they forecast social reforms. Nor is it difficult to understand why he should speak carefully. Slum clearance is a social necessity. The existence of slums in a country as spacious and prosperous as New Zealand, especially after a mere century of European occupation, is an anomaly which cannot be accepted with an undisturbed public conscience. Yet the fact must be admitted. There are corners and areas in the larger cities which have all the makings of an ugly and evil environment. Even in Invercargill, the substantial centre of a wealthy province, there are houses which are scarcely fit for human occupancy. Most of the New Zealand slum areas, indeed, are so bad that nothing less than demolition seems to be the appropriate remedy. Mr Armstrong spoke of “hovels” which could be turned into “suitable homes” by the expenditure of £lOO. He is optimistic. Money spent in that way would merely cover some of the more obvious sores: it could not transform slum areas into neat or even decent suburbs.

The problem would be simple if it were merely a question of persuading neglectful landlords to remember theii’ responsibilities. There is a tendency to think of a landlord as a reactionary capitalist, a man who grows fat upon the rents extorted from oppressed tenants. Possibly a few of these persons do exist in New Zealand, as elsewhere. But an analysis of property statistics would probably reveal that a great many slum dwellings are owned by men and women who depend on them for small unearned incomes, and who are unable to afford the costs of a proper maintenance, especially now that those costs are reaching high levels. The Government’s taxation policy has hit the recipients of unearned income harder than any other section of the people. They include widows, pensioners and the inheritors of modest estates, as well as a wealthy minority. If the Government intends to provide cheap money for landlords unable to make the necessary improvements it may find that in most cases the State will have to meet the full cost of the repairs. At the present time, with materials in short supply, it would not be easy to justify the practice of using them to strengthen old and shoddy buildings. Mr Armstrong hinted that the Act would be invoked discreetly, by Order-in-Council, to meet the more urgent requirements of certain districts. A preliminary survey may already have revealed to the Government the magnitude of the problem. Admittedly, the task must be faced; it is too serious to be postponed. But it calls for bold action, a housing policy which would provide homes for those unable to pay high rents, and a wiser and more comprehensive planning than has yet been attempted in New Zealand. Anything less than this must be a mere makeshift, justifiable only by the plea of war-time expediency.