MORTGAGE BILL

Press, Volume LXXI, Issue 21415, 6 March 1935, Page 12

MORTGAGE BILL

SOLDIER SETTLERS' POSITION AMENDMENT MOVED IN HOUSE DEFEAT BY NINE VOTES (From Our Parliamentary Reporter.] WELLINGTON, March 5. A fear that the transference of returned soldier settlers' securities to the Mortgage Corporation, provided for in the Mortgage Corporation of New Zealand Bill, would react subsequently to the disadvantage of the soldier settlers concerned, was expressed by Mr A. M. Samuel <lnd„ Thames), in the House of Representatives to-day. Mr Samuel objected to the "lumping together" of returned soldiers and ordinary farm mortgagors, who found it impossible to meet their commitments, and he moved an amendment to the bill deleting the appropriate clause. "I am appealing to the Minister on behalf of the returned soldiers of New Zealand." Mr Samuel said. "If this clause is carried, I am very much afraid that the transference of securities will mean hardship for many discharged soldier settlers. At present their affairs are in the hands of the Lands Department, and they arc always; administered with sympathy: but this bill proposes to bring the settlers under the supervision of a semi-private Mortgage Corporation " Mr Samuel referred to Ihe Discharger! Soldier?. Settlement Art, and to its safeguards for the protection of returned men. Of recent years, however, the reserves sel aside for helping soldier settlers who had got into difficulties had been eaten up to balance budgets. Now there was no fund available to assist these men. Some of them had been forced to give orders on their daily cheques and on thenpensions to meet the requirements of the Lands Department, and when their affairs were taken over bv the Mortgage Corporation it might be expected that their lot would be a difficult one. "Patriotic Gesture" "If this legislation goes through in its present form." added Mr Samuel, "it will mean that the sectional legislation passed as a patriotic gesture to the returned soldier will be scrapped, and if this is done the returned soldier settlers will be put into a general pool with every other mortgagor. I am afraid that they will not then meet with the treatment they deserve. The Returned Soldiers' Association should have taken this matter up with the Minister; but. speaking for the branches of the association in my own electorate, I can say that the settlers arc very perturbed about the whole of their securities and property being fut into the control of the corporation. "Surely the country realised its obligation to returned soldier settlers. Many of them had put all their savings as well as borrowed money into their properties. Their securities had in some eases been so uood that tliev had secured no reductions; but their assets hud been slowlv liquidated. Now many of them were in the same position as those who had secured a 50 per cent, reduction. Apparently these men were all going to be classed as individual mortgagors. If they were left under the supervision of Ihe department, they would always have a chance of securing some concession: but what was going to happen to those men who were cracking up after their war services, and who were even now unable t. meet their commitments?" Mr Rushworth's Support Mr 11. M. Rushworth find.. Bay of Islands) agreed with Mr Samuel that the returned soldier settler deserved a continuation of Hie preference and protection he had been accorded by special legislation on the Statute Look It was possible that during the coming years even greater protection would be necessary to implement the promises and the implied promises of assistance for returned men: but the handing over of the securities to tlv:: Mortgage Corporation seemed to indicate that the Government was contracting out of its obligation. Mr Rushworth said he wondered if the Returned Soldiers' Association had been consulted, and whether the soldier settlers knew the true implications of the measure.

"This clause is either right or wrong." said the leader of the Opposition (Mr M. J. Savage). "If it is wrong for returned soldiers, then it is wrong for the others." He said he saw no reason for excluding soldier settler securities and letting the rest "go hang." It was an injustice to all. He intended to divide the House on the whole clause which referred t State Advances mortgages as well. Mr R. A. Wright dnd.. Wellington Suburbs) said he considered that a sub-clause in th section, which empowered the Minister to exclude any class of securities from the operation of the bill, might be a safeguard against injustice to soldier settlers. The Minister for Finance (the Rt. Hon. J. G. Coates): The Minister has power to transfer securities or to return them again. Mr Rushworth: That surely would enlail individual consideration of special cases, which is objectionable. The whole business of patronage which is raised throughout the bill would recur.

Concern Expressed Several other members expressed concern at the position in which relumed soldier mortgagors might be placed. Labour members took the view that fair treatment should be given to all mortgagors, including returned soldiers. "I think Mr Samuel is unnecessarily alarmed about the ultimate benefits returned soldiers will get from their mortgages being transferred to the corporation," said Mr Coates. "It is left for the Minister for Finance to say it returned soldier mortgages should be transferred, what portion should be transferred, or whether those transferred should come back to the Crown." Mr Samuel: Put and take. Mr Coates said the Minister would watch to see how the administration was applied. If in his opinion it seemed better to take back any such mortgages under the original administration, power was given to him to do so. Mr F. Langstone (Lab., Waimarino): But would that not be a vote of noconfidence in the corporation? Mr Coates: No. Circumstances might crop up making that course advisable. The next bill will provide a means by which adjustments may be made between mortgagees and mortgagors. There are at least two classes of returned soldiers affected by this legislation—those under the Discharged Soldiers Settlement scheme, and those outside it. Circumstances might easily arise whereby it would be to the advantage of the Discharged Soldiers Settlement men to come under the Mortgage Corporation. I think the position as set out in the biU is secure. Minister Questioned Mr Samuel: Has this been discussed with the New Zealand Returned Soldiers' Association? Mr Coates: No. I have not discussed it officially with the executive of the association. I think vou can leave it to the Government lo 'see that

whatever terms and conditions are necessary, returned soldiers will be given the consideration to which they are eni itlecl. Mr R. McKeen (Lab.. Wellington South,): Will thev be better or worse off'.' Mr Coales: In some instances returned soldiers are not getting what they deserve; but that applies mostly to men not under the Discharged Soldiers Seillement Act. Mr P. Fraser (Lab.. Wellington Central): How on earth can thev be better off under this bill? Mr Coates: We will see how the bonds go. It is quite likely those paving 5 per cent, to-day may get a reduction jn interest rates and an adjustment, of their mortgages, which will suit them better. I think I can give a clear assurance that returned men have nothing to fear. Mr Samuel asked if the Commissioner of Grown Lands would be appointed to the board to look after the interests of returne-el soldiers. Mi' Coales said he was not. yet in a position to say who would be on the board. Mr .Samuel's amendment was eventually lost by 35 votes to 20.