HOUSING PROBLEM.

Sun (Christchurch), Volume VII, Issue 2031, 18 August 1920, Page 8

HOUSING PROBLEM.

PROVISION FOR RETURNED SOLDIERS. AMENDING BILL PROBABLE [From Our Own Parliamentary Reporter.] WELLINGTON, August 17. Housing matters, as they particularly affect returned soldiers, were discussed at some length in the Housjj of Representatives to-night, when the Statutes Repeal and Expiring Laws Amendment and Continuance Bill was being considered in committee. Mr P. Fraser (Wellington Central) attacked Clause 5, which proposed to amend the definition of "discharged soldier" in connection with the Housing Act by removing the protection from eviction from all members of the Expeditionary Force who did not go oversea. The Prime Minister (Rt. Hon. W. F. Massey) said the proposed change had not been agreed upon without serious consideration. It had been found in some cases that men who had been in camp only for a few days were keeping from occupying a home men who had been in the trenches. He thought that preference should be given to men who had gone to the Front. Mr T. M. Wilford (Hfftt) acknowledged the difficulty of dealing with all cases, but pointed out that many Home Service men would have gone to the Front if they had been allowed to do so. Instead of being sent to the Front they were kept in camp for years, training men and doing other useful work. He thought there should be some provision for a review of individual cases instead of adopting a sweeping method of disqualifying all soldiers who had not been oversea. Mr T. K. Sidey (Dunedin South) considered that the proposal in the Bill was too drastic and sweeping. Mr L. M. Isitt cited the case of one soldier who had been wounded, and who was a married man, with three children. He had purchased a house, and the furniture to furnish it. Then the man in occupation—a soldier, who had gone over with one of the last Reinforcements who had never smelt powder, and who had no children—refused-*o move out. There should be some scheme of preference in such cases. The Hon. Sir William Herries (Minister of Labour) said that there would probably be a Bill brought down to amend the Housing Act, and that w T ould give an opportunity to put in some such provision as hon. members desired. He thought that the present clause was put in, because one of their senior magistrates had ruled that a man who was called up for medical examination and rejected, became a soldier when he received his day's pay. He was then placed on an equal footing with a soldier who had been at the Front and wounded. The Hon. C. J. Parr (Minister of Education) said that the soldiertenant had a very much greater privilege than anyone ejsc; but was it a fair thing that the man who had never smelt powder should be placed in that strong position? He thought that the privilege should be restricted to fighting men, as the Bill proposed. The line must be drawn somewhere, | and it could most easily be drawn as j here proposed. A Home Service tenant would still have the right to go before a magistrate, as a civilian, and to plead undue hardship. Mr J. P. Luke (Wellington North) said that there was a tendency in this country to elevate the Home Service man, which must so cheapen the position of the men who had risked all. The two classes could never be taken together, so he would support the Bill.

Dr A. K. Newman (Wellington East) suggested the setting-up of a commission to deal with the housing difficulties of soldiers. Mr J. R. Hamilton (Awarua) put in a plea for the poorer landlords, who were being imposed upon by tenants under the rent restriction legislation. Mr C. E. Statham (Dunedin Central) suggested that the protection ot the Act was not altogether beneficial to the soldier, since it led some landlords to refuse soldier-tenants absolutely. Mr Massey said that he had taken notes of a number of the points raised, and that he would consult with his colleagues as to the possibility of introducing amendments in another place; but, even if that were not possible, there was the Housing Amendment Bill coming down. <t ..»•.. Mr H. E. Holland (Buller) said that it would be a good thing if, in the Housing Amendment Bill, power was taken by the Government to seize any house being held empty. The Committee divided on the clause, which was retained by 38 votes to nine.