CROWN TENANTS

Timaru Herald, Volume CXLV, Issue 21210, 3 December 1938, Page 10

CROWN TENANTS

Representation On Land Board Answer to Criticism Strong exception to statements made at a previous meeting by Mr A. W. J. Robinson that the Canterbury Land Board was not working in the interests of Crown Tenants and that a “quiet move” was afoot to get another Government nominee on the Board was taken by Mr B. Moyle at a meeting of the Waimate branch of the Fanners’ Union yesterday. “I take exception to statements made by Mr Robinson at the last committee meeting, and I do not think they were In keeping with how one member should act towards another,” said Mr Moyle. Mr Robinson, he said, had criticised the constitution of the Canterbury Land Board, on which the speaker was a Government nominee. Why, he asked, had the Canterbury Board been singled out when there were about a dozen Land Boards in New Zealand? Apparently the Board had done something to offend the people. “When you get a Government nominee in the district, you get a squeal. I want to know where I stand,” he said.

Continuing, Mr Moyle said that three months ago when a remit had come forward from the Fairlie branch advocating the settling of young farmers on the land, Mr Robinson had stated that the Canterbury Land Board showed little concern for the welfare of Crow’n Tenants. The speaker had then pointed out that the specific instance quoted by Mr Robinson had been a case of a mortgagee in possession, which had not passed through the hands of the Board. Two months later he had draggeo up the same instance, and, referring to the constitution of the Board had stated that there was “a quiet movement afoot to get another Government representative on the Board.” That statement Insinuated that some underhand work was going on. He would like Mr Robinson to say who were the people concerned. It seemed that there were no grounds for the statement, but Mr Robinson apparently had access to information. If another Government member was to be put on the Board legislation would be necessary. It vas altogether wrong, he said, to say that the Government nominees were pulling against the representatives of the Crown Tenants. The Board worked as a team and there was no disharmony. Why. he asked, had the Canterbury Board been sorted out? If they were fighting for a principle they should have considered the position over the whole of New Zealand. No Personal Implication Mr Robinson said he was sorry that M. Moyle had taken up rather an unusual attitude. He made the statements because he considered there were insufficient representatives of Crown Tenants on the Board. His* remarks were not intended to convey any personal implication at all. Mr Moyle: Who were you referring to when you said there was a quiet move going on? Mr Robinson: I am not going to explain that now. After asking for a hearing for Mr Robinson, the chairman (Mr J. Dempsey) said that during the discussion at the previous meeting there was no thought in the minds of the members that Mr Moyle was a member of the Board. Mr P. McNeill said that the statements had been directed against the method of election.

Mr Moyle: Why single out the Canterbury Land Board? Mr McNeill: It was the one we were most concerned with. Mr Moyle: Quite a good excuse. After other speakers had stated that no suggestion of personal references had entered the discussion, Mr Moyle said that Mr Robinson had stated that the Canterbury Land Board was not working in the interests of the Crown Tenants. That statement had not been denied or withdrawn. Mr Robinson said he had not been aware that the Government nominees were working in with the Crown Tenants. If he, persona Jy, had any matter to place before the Board, he would take it to Mr Moyle and be satisfied that he would do justice to it The chairman said that if he had considered during the discussion that any member was undermining any other member he would not have let the discussion continue. He did not think there was any such suggestion. Mr Robinson: Not at all. The discussion then lapsed.