THE LAND BILL.

Taranaki Daily News, Volume LV, Issue 128, 17 October 1912, Page 8

THE LAND BILL.

EXPLAINED BY THE PRIME MINISTER. THE DEBATE ADJOURNED. By Telegraph.—Press Association. Wellington, Lust Night, In the House of Representatives tonight, Mr. Massey, in moving the second reading of the Land Amendment Bill, stated that members on his side of the House had no objection to a man having the leasehold if he desired it. It was impossible to include the whole of the party's policy in the present Bill, and another, just as important, would be brought down next session. The people I had come to the conclusion that the holders of leases in perpetuity should be enable to acquire the freehold. The State was losing money every day on L.1.P., for if they only received 3*4 per cent, for money invested in that way and had to pay over 4 per cent, for it, it stood to reason that they were los'ng money. They would still borrow money, but not to the same extent as heretofore. He was asking for a great deal of

power in connection with the subdivision of lands, hut not more than was necessary. A land-owner wishing to dispose of his estate could hand it over to tl Government, and it would be cut up, subdivided, roaded and disposed of, the cost to be a first charge on the proceeds. The most important clause provided for native owners having similar rights. It might take years to bring it into operation, hut he believed that they had in embryo a solution of the native land question. The Bill would give the small man every opportunity of going on the land and also of bringing back to New Zealand many of our young men who had left because they could not get land. The administration of the land laws in the past had been far from satisfactory. He had received hundreds of letters asking for remission of rent, and he believed that if these men were given a square deal they would give a good account of themselves. What was pro- I posed in the Bill on the subject of small grazing runs would probably not give universal satisfaction, but it was an honest attempt at reform. Grazing run leases would be under the L.I.P. tenure with a '2l years' term. Another proposal was for town planning. Any person cutting up land for subdivision must produce the plans for the approval of the Governor-in-Council. Payment to land board members was increased from 10s to 15s a day. Provision was made for the postponement of payment of rent by Crown tenants in case of a settler meet- ■ ing with a natural disaster or showing other sufficient cause. The Bill proposed to place the man who took up land under L.I.P. in the same position as the O.R.P. tenants, providing the former paid the same money as the latter. A. man desiring to purchase land could do so either for cash at three months, or on deferred payment. It was provided that the Minister had power to reduce the capital • value of a section in order to induce a settler to take up a section. With regard to renewable leases of land for settlement, it was proposed to give the fee simple on the present value, less the . present value of the lessees' interest in the unexpired term of the lease, and his interest in the "alue of the improvements effected by him. In regard to gum lands, he proposed to give single men 25 acres free of rent for five years, after which they would-be required to • pay interest ou the nominal value. A married man could have more land. Mr. Mac Donald congratulated the I Prime Minister on introducing his Bill, but was somewhat disappointed at the measure. The Bill would do some good, but for a broad national scheme it would . be a disappointment to those who were 1 starving to get on the land. He was 'f going to move in the direction of putting all tenants on settlement land on ' the same basis regarding the freehold ' tenure.

Mr. Hi»e expressed pleasure that the Government was reintroducing the old deferred payment system, which was the best ever introduced. ! Mr. Sidcy contended that if the State parted with the freehold of all Crown , lands there would be none left for renewable leases for the man of small means. The trend of .the Bill was to favor the individual against the State. Tke conditions governing the scheme of leases was "Heads I win, tails you lose," for the tenant against the State. After midnight Mr. Escott said that he would support the insertion of a compulsory purchasing clause in all leases of land held for the purpose of extracting rent. The debate was adjourned, and the House rose at 12.25.