Bay of Plenty Beacon Published Mondays, Wednesdays and Fridays. WEDNESDAY, SEPT, 17, 1947 EMPTY HOUSES

Bay of Plenty Beacon, Volume 11, Issue 81, 17 September 1947, Page 4

Bay of Plenty Beacon Published Mondays, Wednesdays and Fridays. WEDNESDAY, SEPT, 17, 1947 EMPTY HOUSES

THE intimation by the Prime Minister that legislation will be introduced in the House of Representatives this session to compel owners to let empty houses is not the first hint that has been given by the Government. In March of last year Mr Nash, speaking at Lower Hutt, said that “with due respect to the rights of private property, it might be necessary to consider the introduction of legislation to take, at a fair rental to be paid to the owners, houses which had been unoccupied for a protracted time during times when many people were living in unhealthy conditions.” This statement was made two days after the publication of statistics of untenanted houses in New Zealand. These figures revealed that on the night of the census, September 25, 1945, there were 7136 untenanted dwellings in this country, an increase of more than 500 since the previous census. The classification did not include houses which were temporarily vacant for various reasons nor summer residences. Some two months later, speaking at Auckland, the Prime Minister remarked that he did not think it right or fair that houses should stand empty. “Legislation will be needed,” he said, “and the matter is being studied now.” Mr Fraser was' however, rather vague about what form the legislation would take. He said that there was no question of seizing empty houses, but families should have the opportunity of living' in them until something else could be provided. The Government has had ample time since then for consideration ancl in the meantime little except the enunciation of the general principle can be deduced from these previous references to the matter. The question of compelling owners to let untenanted properties is an involved one and even the mildest application of such legislation would constitute an infringement of private property rights. It will be readily agreed that the need is great for making all possible places of accommodation available for use in such times as these, but it should be made clear that compulsion will be employed only to meet this temporary emergency. So much, indeed, appears to be acknowledged in the previous remarks of Mr Nash and Mr Fraser. It could be pointed out also, that before resorting to the extreme measure of compulsion it is more than probable that an improvement could be made in the housing situation in another direction. There can be little doubt that if recent legislation, which so greatly favoured the tenant at the expense of the owner, were to be modified there would be an immediate reduction in the number of untenanted houses and also many large houses which are at present only partly occupied would be made available for subdivision into flats. Fear of the protection given to tenants by the Fair Rents Act is one reason that there are so many untenanted houses, and the claims under its provisions which are made from time to time in the court reveal the' manner in which it operates at times to the disadvantage of all concerned. .