Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

PROVISIONS EXPLAINED

RURAL HOUSING ACT MINISTER'S STATEMENT Certain provisions of the Rural Housing Act were explained by the Minister of Housing (the Hon. H. T. Armstrong) recently. The Minister was asked for an explanation of the provisions of the act; which said that county councils could not sue the first mortgagee or the owner of the propeity if the lessee to whom the money was advanced defaulted in the payment of the interest and llu; sinking fund. Mr Armstrong said that county councils were fully secured in that they had a lien over the property, and could finally sell it,, if they thought it advisable, to recoup them selves for the amount owing. The county councils were also safeguarded in a similar manner in respect of property. County Councils Safe. The State departments were on all fours with the private mortgagee, said the Minister. The reason for the provision of the bill was that previously the mortgagee could no! be held responsible in the case of default. The county councils were safe because it was the very first charge upon the property, State or private. If a farmer got into a hopeless financial tangle, as was. sometimes the case, said Mr Armstrong, the rates had first to be cleared. Every reasonable safeguard had been taken as far as local bodies were concerned. Under the rural housing scheme, the Government, through the local bodies,, could lend to the farmer up to 100 per cent of the value of the security. There wns no initial cost to the farmer at all, his first payment being the halfyearly rates. Money would be lent to the county councils at I) per cent, and the county councils could lend it at up to 3% per cent. The terms were for 20 to 25 years. Security for the money advanced to the local bodies was taken on the general rates of the district. "Farmers' Best Opportunity" "This is the best opportunity ever given to the farmers," said Mr Armstrong, "to secure accommodation for themselves and their employees" The Government had prepared booklets giving all details of the scheme, said Mr Armstrong. Plans of suitable houses were included. The booklets would be distributed soon. The houses could be factory built, and taken to the sites in sections. They would be considerably cheaper than the houses erected by the Government in the towns.

Permanent link to this item
Hononga pūmau ki tēnei tūemi

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/BPB19400313.2.44

Bibliographic details
Ngā taipitopito pukapuka

Bay of Plenty Beacon, Volume 2, Issue 135, 13 March 1940, Page 7

Word count
Tapeke kupu
395

PROVISIONS EXPLAINED Bay of Plenty Beacon, Volume 2, Issue 135, 13 March 1940, Page 7

PROVISIONS EXPLAINED Bay of Plenty Beacon, Volume 2, Issue 135, 13 March 1940, Page 7

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert