SETTLEMENT OF FARMER SERVICEMEN

Chronicle (Levin), 18 May 1946, Page 4

SETTLEMENT OF FARMER SERVICEMEN

BROBLEMS IN SECURING LAND The difficulties faced by the Levin Rehabilitation Committee in obtaining land for ex-servicemen whowished to take up farming were epiphasised by several speakers during the discussion of a suggesti.on made at the annual general pieeting of the Levin R.S.A. this • week'by Mr. A. M. Colquhoun, to tiie eifect that an advisory rehabilitation committee should be set up outsjde the official rehabilitation committee. Mr. Colquhoun • considered that such a- committee wou)d; pxoyidp a greater backing for returned; men th.an one xepresentative on the Levin Rehabilitation Committee could give. He explained: that the. suggestion dxd np.t imjpLy that the present representation on the corrimitteq was. ineffectual. The main purpose of the ' body he proposed would be to, give men the full backing of the R.S.A. , and to assist them with advice atnd g.u.idance in their re-settlement. In commenting on the propogal, Mr. N. M. Thomson s.aid that it was not generally realised that Mr. H. B. Burdekin did a gxeat deal of work in assisting men with advice, ! and he had been of great help to those requiring assistance. He considered that Mr. Burdekin was now carrying out the duties that would be undertaken by such a cojn.rn,ittee. The president, Mr. H. J. Lancasi ter outlined the constitution of the rehabilitation committee. as it stood I at present, and, added that he, con- ! sidered the suggestion to be superfluous. The organisation of rehabilitation in this district as, it- was ; catered for the. interests of both [toWn and country ex-servicemen. j At this point the question of- the ; provision of land for rehabilitation | puxpos.es was- introduced, and a i lengthy discussion on the situation ; followed. Speakers emphasised the difficulty of persuadine people to • sell their land for rehabilitation of returned servicemen. Mr. Thomson explained to the meeting that this was largely due to a fallacy prevalent among farmers that their land would be taken from them at a price far below its value. The law in respect to the sale of land to ex-servicemen, he pointed out, made this impossible. 1 Mr. Burdekin fully endorsed the • remaxks of Mr. Thomson, and • explained that it was ignorance of this law which was proving a major :hindrance to the re-settlement of ! men on the land. He pointed out , that where the Land Settlement Board purchased land for. settle- ; ment of ex-servicemen it was not 'subject to the Land Saies legisl-a-tion, and negotiatipns could bje ma.de fxee from any ' fear of the price being subjected to variation by the Land Saies Committee. It was also pointed.' out by 'Mr. Burdekin that the term on which a serviceman took up land- purchased by

the Land' Settlement Board was very favourable to the serviceman. No matter what the price, the Government paid for the land and the serviceman was only asked to pay a rent based on the productive value and calculated on a cbnseryative flgure.