The Wanganui Chronicle. TUESDAY, MAY 3, 1927. NEW ZEALAND LAND AREAS

Wanganui Chronicle, Volume LXXXIII, Issue 19830, 3 May 1927, Page 6

The Wanganui Chronicle. TUESDAY, MAY 3, 1927. NEW ZEALAND LAND AREAS

The figures in respect of land ownership in New Zealand which were given by the Leader of the Opposition in his recent address in Wanganui no doubt will have a somewhat disturbing look to those who do not know, or who do not remember, the actual position of a few years ago. When considered in the light of comparatively recent history, they are a source of satisfaction and not of gloom. It is not meant by that remark that they represent an ideal position. But they do represent a very much improved position, though probably Mr Holland did not desire them to be regarded in that light. The speaker, in contending that land was being aggregated in New Zealand, said that the 43,500,000 acres of occupied land were held by 85,734 people, and that of these 6978 persons held nearly 30,000,000 acres, leaving the remaining 78,756 with less than 14,000,000 acres between them. Mr Holland’s figures are quite correct. They are those for 1926 as appearing in the New Zealand Official Year Book and show the position in respect of land held in areas of 1000 acres and over. The inference sought to be drawn is that the Government is responsible for the “mopping up” of land that is implied in this statement, and that the position set out is due to bad administration on its part. It is as well, therefore, to show the position in 1911, the year before the Reform Government took office. The figures to be quoted will be drawn from the same source, the Official Year Book, and they will show that, so far from making the position worse, the present Government has, in actual fact, very much improved it. FIGURES AND FACTS The Year Book shows that, in 1911—the year before the Reform Government took office—the total number of holdings was 73,876. In 1926, as shown by Mr Holland, the total number was 85,734. If these figuresjmean anything at all, they show that, in the fifteen years under the present Government’s regime, 11,858 new settlers have gone on the land. The total area occupied in 1911 was 40,238,126 acres. That occupied in 1926, as Mr Holland pointed out, was 4.3,606,829 acres. The figures thus show that in fifteen years, 3,368,703 acres of new land have been settled, a very fair record. The number of holdings of 1000 acres and over in 1911 was 5796; in 1926 it was 6978. The area thus held was 28,951,468 acres in 1911; in 1926 it was 29,654,536 acres. Mr Holland works out the 1926 figures in percentages, showing that 8.1 per cent, of to-day’s landholders hold 69 per cent of the total area. If he will also work out the same class of percentages for 1911, he will find that 7.8 per cent, of the occupiers at that date held 71 per cent of the total. In other words, with a bigger percentage of such holders to-day, there is actually a lesser percentage of land so 'held than there was in 1911, which again makes the position better than it was fifteen years ago. These are the figures and there is not getting away from them. In considering some of the big areas held, say over 20,000 acres, it has to be remembered that' most of these are in barren or mountainous country which can only be worked in large tracts. For a man to attempt to make a living with a couple of hundred acres on the rocks of Western Otago or on the pumice lands of the North Island would be to commit financial suicide. It is this class of country which is chiefly represented in the Year Book figures of the big holdings. It is not contended that the position as it actually exists to-day is an ideal one, or that it is capable of no improvement. Mr Holland’s figures no doubt look impressive enough, when taken only by themselves. But they are not a correct statement of the position. To show the real situation they must be taken in comparison with past years. And the Year BookMr Holland’s own authority—shows that, during the past fifteen years, the position, instead of growing worse, has shown a steady improvement. The Government is surely entitled to some credit ' for that improvement. And in all fairness, it is surely entitled to have the position when it took office correctly pointed out.