RURAL HOUSING

Bay of Plenty Beacon, Volume 2, Issue 196, 7 August 1940, Page 6

RURAL HOUSING

Sir, —-I was very disappointed to see that the County Council had undertaken to entirely ignore the rate payers in the above subject and that they have undertaken, on their own initiative, to raise the huge sum of fifty thousand pounds for a rural housing scheme, without first having taken *. poll and ascertained the feeling of the ratepayers. County Councillors were elected to attend - to our loading requireihents and liot to delve into state advances. Apart from this our local Farmers* Union have voted it out oh at least, two occasions and the Council is be notified of their objection. I also think this must increase our council's s!taff expenditure as/it will be necessary to engage an overseer as our engineer cannot very well undertake this extra work. I notice there is bait of 10 per cent put lip to the council on all houses erected, or in course of erection by the. 31st December, and would be pleased to learn whether any of the councillors or staff are offered a similar amount if they get it through. ■ . \ - I would like to point out that the ... Farmers' Union was addressed by the Social Security Department a " month ago and it- was stated then that they could erect Public Works cottages on a farm requiring e'xrtra labour at a very small cost. Then why should any man be allowed to erect a house costing six or seven hundred pounds with the risk of in- , creasing the rates of other ratepayers when this will serve the purpose just as well. - Apart from all this can anyone explain to me how the rural hous- , ing scheme can be a war effort. It Is money spent / which- returns ' ing in production* That money when spent cannot be used in productive work and therefore cannot be . good war economy, I noticed lately that England had stopped all,her house-building schemes as she considers them uneconomic in war time. I would be rather interested if our councillors who passed the resolution in favour of the Rural Hous , ing Scheme would point out the reasons why the State Advar.ees do not undertake to meet the ratepayers requiring extra houses to accommor date farm employees and lodge the cost against the property instead of shoving their obligation on to other j shoulders. I do not think anyone would object to the scheme if it were made a charge on the individual property : concerned, instead of a charge on the whole of the ratepayers; in the case of default. Some people are very confident it won't ever become a charge on the ratepayers but I wish to ask whiat' . will be the conditions when a man puts up a house worth seven hun- - dred on a property making it fully" " mortgaged under present conditions ' when his income drops by half. Wi!l it then become a charge on the ratepayers of the district? Yours etc., RATEPAYER.