HOW "WORKMEN'S HOMES" WAS CRIBBED.

Wanganui Chronicle, Volume XLIX, Issue 12657, 20 November 1905, Page 7

HOW "WORKMEN'S HOMES" WAS CRIBBED.

In tho course of his speech in this city last week, Mr. F. Pirani dealt with tho question o£ workmen's homes and criticised tho proposals of thc> Government at some length. He pointed out that the Government's proposals were in some respects impracticable and that the conditioas would harass tho workers unrecessarily. Mr. Pirani made it iplain that the Government had taken a good idea and twisted it out of recognition and then fathered it as its own. The worker who goes in for a horns under tho Seddonian system will have to pay rent on a 9 per cent, basis for thirtytwo years (unless he goes in for tlws fifty years' lease), he Will have to keep the property in repair at his own expense ,and at the dictation of a Gov-* eminent inspector; he will have to pay tho insurances ordered by the law, and he will have to pay alb the rates an d taxes- And all he gets foav this' is a wretched £350 house.

The idea the Government stole was Mr J. Bollard's, and a plank of the policy of the Opposition. For eight yearns Mi* Bollard has been persistently agitating for a workmen's home scheme without success. Here axe some extracts from a speech of his in 1902 <m the question:—•

"... There is a necessity to provide land for respectable 'workmen in the neighbourhood of the large cities. Now, after five years' agitation I induced t<he Government to 'buy some land in "tine neighbourhood of Auckland, and the land was bought cheap enough; but not a road or a bridge has yet been made to onalble tlhe people to take up then* section. ... I hare, as the House knowr, taken great (interest in the question of providing land for workmen's homes. I suppose I have had 150 persons at my office enquiring about the land for the proposed homes. Th© people want t(he right to get the freehold, tlhe right to purchase the 'and and make the hornets their own; but there is a large number of respectable working-men with families who have not the money to build homes for themselves. The Government will not advance them enough money to build, although in the neighbourhood of i«>ilway stations we know that it would l« a safe investment to build such homes. The Government say they will advance the money, £ few £, up to £50; tut what is the us© of offering a man £50 if he has not 50s? If the Governint>nt *would build the houses it would be li'llio safe .as regards the investment. J hey could charge 5 per cent, interest on the value of the land and buildings, kind 1 per oemt. sinking fund, which would give the men the land in ilnvty rix years, and the 'buildings, too; h-r. ihe cutting-up of the land in question v.ill not be a success unless such a ccii^rne aa I have indicated is carried our..

. . These working-men have u-ked the Government to give them Ui'vaJ, and they ihiaye given them a stono; but the men will not take up thii3 lai.d under present conditions, lysoa vse if a. man has £50 or £150, instead *, F gon.'g on the Government land, he pn-s < c-ds to buy a sectiion for £50 or £.00, cud he goes to a firm of sawmill <irs, who will give him the timber to build his house. In fact <tihey will pub up the house for ihriim, charging him 5 per ctit. on the cost until he pays it off. It would pay the State handsomely to take thes© people from tftieir surroundings in Auckland and the other large cities, because these respectable men have to Obning up t'heiir families, and under tlheir present surroundings the moral position is far wotrss than the sanitary, and I repeat, at would pay the State to eelbtle tihem in comfortable homes in a respectable manner."

That 'Wias Mr Bollard's proposal— the Government to cut up land in four-acre dots close <to the large cities, to build Ihomes thereon, 'and to charge 5 per cent, interest as rent with 1 per cent, sinking fund, '_ which 'would. enable the worker- to acquire the freehold in 36 years.. Now, at.vastly greater cost, with aH sorts of. Juanassing restrictions, tlhe worker can only acquire the freehold if the Land Board 35 years henoe is willing to give it to Mm. Yet we have tlhe Government claiming great credit for its " Liberal" workmen's homes proposals, and Mr T. H. Dayey going about the electorate of Ohrustchurch East telling tlhe -public that it is " one of his own proposals." It is merely an illustration of the policy of the Seddon Government. It has been cribbing the Opposition's proposals for years and parading flhem before" itlhe electors as its own. But if it must steal ideas, it need not haeth (tJhem into a hotch-potch before giving them to the public.