SOLDIER SETTLEMENT.

Star (Christchurch), Issue 16542, 28 September 1921, Page 2

SOLDIER SETTLEMENT.

THE TOTAL COST.

[From Our Correspondent.} WELLINGTON, September 27. It was stated to the House to-day by the Hon D. H. Guthrie, Minister in charge of soldier settlement, that losses through soldiers failing to keep their undertaking with the Department had been extremely small, being only £15,227 oil a total expenditure of nearly eighteen millions. He thought it an extraordinarily fine result, seeing that the country had been passing through slumni conditions. The matter arose as tho result of a question from Air Savage, calling attention to a statement by a delegate to the Returned Soldiers’ Association that losses sustained oil sections which were thrown up had to be loaded on the settler who subsequently took up the section. This was denied by the Alinister, who explained tho whole procedure showing that only when, the land liad been so improved that it Mould stand eYtra capitalisation was this done. Only a few soldiers had thrown up their sections. Air Wilford: Here is a petition from twelve who cannot carry on. Air Guthrie: It does not* matter if there are ~tuenty-four. Here arc tho facts. Ho went on to indicate details of advances to soldiers to August 31 as follows: £ Current advances * „ 2.922 057 Advances for farms . . 8,559.274 Advances for dwellings . 6,358,459 Total . . . £17,839,790 The repayments had totalled £1,156,433. The A fillister gave details covering the whole position for five years up till August 31, in connection with failures to keep to tho conditions, as follows : Arrearfe .... 358,270 Postponements . . . 109,549 Capitalisations . . 8,4*22 Remissions of rent . . 10,202 Remissions of instalments or interest -*• . . . 331 Sonic of the -postponements, continued the Alinister, had already been paid, comprising £12.247 in respect of rent, £lll on current account, £2436 in respect of interest on farms, and £7l interest on’.--dwellings. The Government had discouraged tho capitalisation of arrears, . .preferring postponement to making it a permanent burden. Out of over 9UC*O leases issued only 266 had been-forfeited, of an aggregatc area of 50,266 acres, the rents lost being £15,227. The Department had foreclosed on nine farms and 19 dwellings, its losses through forfeitures being £2693 in respect of farms and £1313 in respect of advances on current account.

TER ATS OF TRANSFERS. The Minister went on to detail particulars of transferred properties, showing that there had been 476 such transfers, in connection with which £5688 had been paid as consideration money. After all that had been heard about the tremendous losses on those transactions the actual fact was that the purchase price of transferred properties was £513,000, while the Department had acquired them for £500,060. As lor general remissions and the comparatively small sums lost could it be said, he asked, that these sums Mere really lost, when there Mas a set off against these amounts, tho settlement of so many soldiers on tho land and in business? AVhat Mould have been said if the Government had declined to risk any money on the settlement of these men for fear it would lose something? Tho country had given the men every chance, and although some bad failed to make good the country bad giveu them their chance and had not dropped severely upon it.