RURAL HOUSING SCHEME.

Bay of Plenty Beacon, Volume 3, Issue 213, 16 September 1940, Page 4

RURAL HOUSING SCHEME.

Sir, —As a ratepayer, and in view of the meetings which are to take place at Edgecumbe and Taneatua on Tuesday (to-morrow) I feel that I should have something to say .on the question of the County Rural Housing Scheme. Do farmers ise just what this imposition is, how far-reaching its effects, and how unjust its conception. In the first place, Sir, let it be understood that I am not against the idea of bettering the housing conditions on farms. Far from it. I realise that to many it would be a God-send. But why. must the whole of the ratepayers go guarantee for the . benefit of a few. Why ca;\^£- : the financing be done by the individual farmer direct with the Government; 5 The matter would then be a personal and a watertight one with no * responsibilities foisted upon the other ratepayers. I'll admit that the thing looks nice enough providing everything goes alright, but it is the emergency which we should be '* prepared to face, not the pleasant and easy mothocl of authorising loans. What is the position for the; ratepayer in the small county town ships? What possible interest can they have in a scheme for building houses for; needy farmers—yet if

this schemegoes through, they will be pooled in the joint and ; several which, mind you, is a. priority claim, collectable, before mortgage, or any other claim against the land. The most iniquitous thing of the lot is (again to my mind) the fact that in spite of the county-wide guarantee, the;farmer who is really on his uppers, and really in-need of assistance, is denied it because he has not the necessary assets. Well, ;Mr Editor, its merely a repetition of the old saying 'to him that hath, shailt be given and the poor blighter just scratching along goes guarantor for the chap who is already making decent headway. Where is the justice in. the scheme? Here's another point, ' Is there a worse time to launch out upon a house building campaign, than the present? I doubt it. It is well known that houses to-day cost twice . as" much as they did five years ago.. What I want to knoAv is—who's going to stand the racket when values are going to be written down, arid normal times return? Only the ratepayers as far as I can siie. I think perhaps I have said enough. I could go on, but perhaps your readers would get tired of queries, as to how the sum of £50; 000 was going to be administered, how the building was going to be supervised, how the county by-l'aws will apply, and dozens of olhers. ii.^ly/JidfJe 1 ! that farmers will go mefetings with a fair conception of, what ' they are talking about and not a hazy notion of easy money and a quick cut to Utopia. Yours etc., JOHN BLUNT.