A Long Sitting

Stratford Evening Post, Issue 66, 15 October 1930, Page 5

A Long Sitting

PARLIAMENT AT WORK. LAND LAWS AMENDMENT BILL. MEASURE PASSED. Press Association —Copyright. WELLINGTON, This Day. Consideration in committee of the La'nd Laws Amendment Bill was continued in the House of Representatives during the early hours of this morning. Amendments were introduced hy Governor-General’s message consisting of a machinery clause, and another giving the holders of educational endowment leases the same privileges as crown leases. These were embodied in the Bill. An amendment moved by Mr Fletcher to provide that the disposal of inferior crown lands for purpose of development should be by lease was defeated by to 13. Mr C. A. Wilkinson moved that power t 0 dispose of such lands should be in the hands of the minister and not the Lands Board. On a division, voting was twentynine both for and against the amendment, the chairman giving his casting vote against the amendment. MR COATES’ AMENDMENT. Hon. J. G. Coates moved that no sale’ of these lands should be made unless by consent of Parliament, and asked the minister to accept the amendment or state the Government’s objection. Hon. A. E. Ransom said this proviso would have the effect of delaying or even preventing a transaction. Mr P. Fraser said he thought the minister would be wise to accept the safeguard offered by the amendment. Mr Ransom stated that he would accept an amendment limiting the area to be disposed of without the sanction of Parliament to 15,000 acres. Tli e present Act imposed a limit of live thousand. Mr Coates said lie did not think the area should even he 10,000' acres. He knew of several areas upon which eyes were being cast already.

A.nIDUMEAT ACCEPTED. After further discussion'. Air Ransom saiu, as it seemed lo be tlie wisli of ihe House mat me limit of live thousand acres be placed on auy transaction tfiat did not have the consent of Parliament he would accept an amendment to this effect. Mr Coate s altered Ms amendment accordingly, and it was carried on tlie voices. Mr W. Nash opposed the clause providing for the abolition of the Hutt Valley land settlement account, and the transfer of moneys to the lands for settlement account. He was supported by members of the Labour and Reform parties. Mr W. Nash urged that tlie fund should be allowed to retain' its original identity so that the history of the Hutt Valley settlement should remain intact, It gave the public a valuable insight into the developments in connection with the railway deviation. The clause was rejected ou a division by 31 to 21. The division list is:—( For the clause (21)Atmore, Broadfoot, Glinkard, Cobbe, de la Perrelle, Hawke, Healy, Hogan, Lye, Lysnar, McDonald, Macpherson, Makitanara, Munhs, Murdoch, Ngata, Ransom, Sm;‘it/li, Stullworthy, Taverner, Veitch. Against the clause (31): —Armstrong, Bitchener, Black, Burnett, Campbell, Carr, Coates, Dickie, Field, Fraser, Hall, Hamilton, H. Holland, H. E. Holland, Jones, Jordan, Kyle, Langstone, MacMillan, Martin, Alason, Alassey, J. A. Nash, W. Nash, Samuel, Savage, Syke, Waite, Williams, Wright, Young. The Bill wa s then reported to the House with the amendments. It was read a third time and passed. The House roao at 4 a.m. till 2.30 this afternoon.