RURAL CREDITS.

Press, Volume LX, Issue 18218, 31 October 1924, Page 9

RURAL CREDITS.

COMMENTS ON BILL.

COMMERCIAL MEN HOSTILE.

(STZCIiL TO "THr FBESS.^

WELLINGTON, October 30,

The Rural Credits Bill, introduced by the Government in (ho (lying hours of the session, is genci-ally condemned, even by those in whose interests it is supposed to have l.een introduced. The turners' L'nion is dissatisfied because it does not £0 far enough, and the conijefcial eommunity thinks it is a danger„tt» measure savouring of class legislation.

Several commercial and financial authorities were interviewed by the "Post" to-day on (lie Farm Land Mortage Associations Bill. None of them had raorc. than the newspaper precis of the measure to go upon in forming an opinion, bnt. judging by the reports all »ere quite clear that the measure was in the nature of pledging the whole people jjtho interests of a section. All agreed jilt the Bill, if it became Jaw, would .set D na vicious and 'dangerous precedent. One gentleman remarked: We could Mpect this kind of thing from Coniinujilts, but from the present. Government jt jj inexplicable. The country is to lend farmers, and farmers only, anything U P l 0 £L~O,OOO for ton years, and to lend them that sum free of interest. The Associations will also be immune from income-tax. This Bill is an outrage on the intelligence of people outride of the Legislative C'hambors. "No Chance of Passing." Another authority on finance said: I would like to have the Bill, but so far as I hare read its features through the papers T. think it has not a chance of going through. For one thing, it will not satisfy the appetite of the farmers for cheap money, and plenty of it. What is £150,000? That is the limit to them. They want hundreds of thousands- I sec that the money to be advanced is to be taken from the Consolidated Fund, that is, the whole commailty is to lend money to the farmers free of interest. The thing is positively absurd. Why should (he taxpayers of the eeuntry do this for a section of the tountry? Why not provide capital free of interest, for the merchant, shopkeeper. and manufacturer! Again, if the Government is (o lend money to these Associations free of interest, what about the Advances to Settlers and other lending Departments of the Government who are charging (S per cent, for their loans to farmers? How and where will they stand? I notice that the applicant for a loan through these proposed Associations is to receive an advance up to 70 per ecnt. of his capita) value, but, he most take up a £ o share for every £ 100. Does he get that £."> deducted from bus advance ? If lie does, then be receives only 63 per cent, of the capital value of the property mortgaged. Then what becomes of that £o .shore,, and where does it go when lie ceases to be 8 shareholder, or on completion of payment of the advance made to him I' I would like to carefully study tho Bill itself before saying more than I have said already, but on the face of it it seems an absurd proposal brought in for the purpose of catching the votes of farmers. I imagine that some of them are too wary birds to be caught with such cliafL A Banker's Views. A banker expressed no opinion on tha measure, but he remarked that if the Government would lend each of *'•- ( banal trading in the Dominion £150.000 on tie same terms as it proposed to lewirtoney to Farm Land Mortgage Associations, no doubt the banks would ho prepared to lend settlers money on the terms provided for in the Bill, and vrbuld gladly do so. "This legislation," remarked another icoepted authority on trade and finance, '-•ia out and our class legislation. The Government proposes a maximum of 1160,000, but will it stop there? Not a bit, If the Government intends to lend to one section of the people (the farmers) large sums of money free of interest, whv not to every other section? The whole tdea is essentially Bolshevik in conception. To put it mildlv it is class legislation of the worst possible descriptor.. I see no provision made for the payment of_ m-come-tax by these associations. Why notp Whv should they escape and the individual taxpayer be keot up to tbe mark? If the banks were immune from income-tax, I am assured that they could reduce their rate by 1 per cent. I wonder -whether the Government is reallv in earnest about the Bill. It teems so utterly absurd, so glaringly I niece of out and out class legislation, and never intended to bo proceeded with. Fanners' Regrets. At the meeting of the executive of the New Zealand Farmers' Union today. Mr W. J. Poison referred to the BiU. He said that he did not know What induced Mr Massey to bring down the measure in the form he had. The Farmers' Union had not been consulted in tho matter. The amounts set aside under the Bill to meet the moratorium wore altogether inadequate. The loans under the Bill would be so limited as to be of no use whatever to hig producers. Unless the producers Of the Dominion received Government support they would not get any money 'from overseas. ~ , J Mr Poison added that ho would be prepared to accept anything which he thought would assist the producers, but this Bill was not even half a loan. After discussion it was resolved unanimously; "That this executive views with/great regret the proposals PBblished to-dav with regard to agnctiltural credits', and are still hopeful that a majority of the House will agree to the report of tho Committee of the 'House, which recommended powers being given to establish agricultural ijuuiks on the lines of the Danish institutions.