LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL.

Dominion, Volume 1, Issue 30, 30 October 1907, Page 8

LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL.

. THE DESPATCH OF BUSINESS. 'At yesterday's .'sitting of tho Council, the Uttorney-GVneral ■ (Hon. Dr. '-' Fmdlay) moved':—'.'That'', the .Standing Orders bo. so far suspended for the remainder of tho: session as to enahlo, all Government Bills toi be ; put' through 'air.their stages/at'-tho one- sit-' ting." ''■"""« '",'.., .'■;'". "" -.'■.'" :• This was carried without discussion. I :;.;, FIREiBRIGADES BILL. ",, v „,,-\;i i "CONSIDERED IN COMMiTTEE.;. '! Oh.'tb'e; motion to go' into' Committee on the Fire Brigades Bill, 7 ' The Hon. S:T.'George (Auckland) said tho measure was.'in "his.opinion, more, workable than the' Bill. of last session, /oven with tho'addition of "the amending Bill recently ! introduced.' Tho clari'so which put it into the power of the cities in which Fire' Boards had been, established to dissolve those Boards ami; return' to the former system had his approval. He could not he .'.sure.-whether the Governnioiit' really wished to,:encourage,the formation of. Firo, Boards.' .If. such was the intention, it seemed strange' that the, Government contributions-to"the revenue of the; Boards should bo so'small.', as proposed. Ho thought tho Boards would rather be without tho Government aid and 'Government representation,'.'if the'- aid was not to be'hiore ■liberal'.. He,noticed that, the Government contribution, in.the case of the. City of Wellington, was not altered, although the Col : onial' Secretary had stated'that the-amount inserted woiild-have been greater, but,for a miscalculation.-' Ho .was. strongly of opinion that the measure would not meet with the "approval of principal centres, and thatj they would take .advantage of .the permissive .clause to withdraw, from, its'operation. Ho regretted that all the Fire Boards in small places were to bo continued. During the year, since .the passing of. the. first Act,; : no fewer than.fifteen Fire Boards had been "set up. Out of those, 'only five, came within the limit, which would allow thorn to bo established; uhdor,tho new Bill, that was to say, only five had,,a population of 5000 or over. In other places the populations were less, even down to 1100. _ Ho would move a now subclause that a proposal; to form a Firo Board could not he carried unless one-third.of those qualified recorded their votes. He gavo'instances where'a' very small population of the' ratepayers; voted, culminating with the'case of Palmerstoii North, where; put of 1365 ratepayers (tho population being 10,239) only fifty-four' voted, a nuniber which might have been', made up 'by,tho firemen and their wive 3, who wero interested parties. The cost of'fire" prevention iri Palmerston North,, according to"'the Board's estimate, would be considerably greater than : before. The measure required a certain amount of guarding, lest Boards should be set up in this way.

The. motion to go into Committee was 'then ■ carried;oil'the voices. . '..' New Fire Districts. Clause 5 provides for tho establishment of new fire districts on an application sanctioned /by a. "poll of the ratepayers. _ Tho Hon; S; T. George moved the following" hfiv.' sub-clause: — •'. "(e.) And no such proposal shall be deemed to be carried unless affirmed by a majority of the valid votes recorded, and at least onefourth of the ratepayers on the roll record their votes." ' This was accepted by tho 'AttorncyrGoneral, and carried on the voices, Water for Fire Prevention. At clause 45 .(" board to have use of water mains, etc."); tho Attorney-General, to meet an objection raised by the Hon. J; Anstey, agreed to insert a proviso " that the water ■in no private well'or tank shall be used for drill only, without the consent of tho owner." The Hon.- J. Barr suggested that the local authorities needed similar protection. He moved a; prior amendment to withdraw tho right of the boards to the free use of water for drills. •-.'.. The Attorney-General said tho local bodies would not need such protection, because there would-be three representatives of the local body on each board. He thought common senso of the. boards, constituted as they would be, might be trusted.' ''' The amendment was defeated by 25 to 3. The proviso, .it's'moved by the'.Hon. Dr. Findlay, was then passed. The- remaining- clauses of tho Hill wore adopted with no other amendments except those recommended by tho Joint Statutes Revision Committee. ■ •'.'.- The Bill was then read a third .time and passed. ' • ■ . ■ _ , ( ... THE LAND BILL. •',. SECOND READING. "-, SPEECH BY THE ATTORNEY-GENEIttL. Tho Attorney-General 'moved tho second reading of the Land Laws Amendment Bill.

The Hon. Dr. Findlay said that land legislation in this country, down to .the Act of 1892 had an interesting aim devious history. It was a history of such solf-intorest, intrigue, and manrouvring as characterised no other branch of legislation in this country to the samo extent. It, was tho one question which had divided class from class —the broad class of the poor, from the narrow class of the'rich, and the large landowner from the small one—and had presented itself in an acute' form at various stages 'of our history durjng the last fifty years. A History of . The history of land administration and legislation'was largely a history of failure and mistake, both iii this country and throughout- Australasia. 'He desired them bo look back fifty years, and consider the magnificent endowment of land which these countries then had, and ask themselves what had become of it. They could not make such an inquiry without reflecting on the administration of the past. .'And to-day they could touch no question in New Zealand that was beset with a greater conflict of interests than that samey land question. As soon as one approached it, one raised the acrid and acrimonious hostility of tho landed section of the people, who had a full measure of intelligence, and means of organisation, and of making their views felt. ' That.section of tho people snccecdcd out of all proportion to their rights, in'gctting their voices hoard. It was dishoartcning to tho reformer to find himself opposed by such a powerful combination, backed by other vested interests, and with the Press of the country largely on the same side. : .

Apathy of the Landless. The reformer had' tp fight all this, and meanwhile the mass of people turned to him an almost apathetic oyo and ear. Ho took leave-to'think that the efforts the Government had been making on.behalf'of the landless-_ had not; elicited from them that enthusiasm and support tnat the motives of the Government deserved.- So it was always. When the. reformor sot out to do good, which, being widespread, was-therefore not so markedly, felt, he had to faco, on the one hand, indifference and apathy, and, on-the other, that, hostility which' tho privileged classes were always ready to show when their position appeared to be threatened. Previous Efforts at Reform. ■ In 1882, the'late Mr.'• Rolleston made a heroic and patriotic effort to create for the peoplo some lasting interest in tho unsold lands of tho State; but he had to give way and.change his perpetual lease into that wretched : thing which gave the right to convert to the freehold within thirty-threo years. Ho bad intended to have recurring revaluations, so that tho State would have some share of the unearned increment. Until tho late Sir John M'Konzie came forward in 1892, no one else dared to take up the land question. Ho declared that not another acre fof the unsold Crown lands should bo sold. Yet what took place? The samo forces were again ''set in motion,''and the 'result was the same as in the'case of Mr. Rolleston's land policy. ; Although Sir John M'Kenzie had dc- ; clared that no provision for the sale of Crown lands should appeart in any Bill of his, and' had said at the hustings that he was opposed to the right of purchase in the case of any Crown lands, yet ho was finally driven to placing on; the Statute Book one'of tho most ludicrous tenures that had. ever .existed' in any country—the lease in perpetuity, it was neithor fish, flesh; nor fowl, and though it was : .satisfactory enough for'the tenant, •it was very bad for the country. A Coed Fight. Tho Hon. G. Jones: '"It was the only thing he could do at the time." Hon. Dr.-.-Findlay: ■•" Yes, I know that: Arid'now, we aro criticised, for giving way. Have wo not put up.as good a light as anyprevious Government? We havo done more. Wo have.taken a greater step'forward than any of.our predecessors." Tho Ministry, and especially thp Minister for Lands, deserved credit for what-had been done. They were •told that they were making, at the beck of the Socialists, an;.attack, hidden or open, ho was not sure .which, upon the freehold. Ho was a Socialist, and he gloried in it. Ho charged back upon tho critics who called tho Ministers Socialists that they were ignorant of the meaning of the term. No one who addressed himself to history and studied the tide of human progress could do other than confess himself a Socialist, else lio would set himself against human'progress,' which, as Mr. Chainberalin had said, spelt human kindness.'

Socialistic Legislation. They were not going to have revolutionary Socialism in Now Zealand. The. people might be credited with too much common-sense for that. But there would be added to tho Statute Book those measures of progressive Liberalism or. Socialism,,or call it what they would,'which would-extend the functions of the State in a carefully safeguarded fashion for the good of the people. What, after all, was tho tondoncv of very much of the legislation of,tho last sixteen year§? -,He would 'not weary his hearers with a full catalogue. But if to take land. from, large owners by. force, under tho authority of a Statute, and to divide it , among a number of landless peoplo was not Socialism, then what was it? Surely the action of the Stato in intervening in.-such a pronounced fashion to assist a section of the peoplo—the landless —was Socialism. That was one illustration of a long succession ,of Socialistic measures! There was the.Advancos to Settlers Office and the whole airay of. tho divisions of the Agricultural Department. These were interventions of tho State to assist largo classes of the, people, and ho believed such measures were approved by a large majority in that Councjl. In fact, we .were all Socialists in the sense in which the present King had said that ho was a Socialist. No one need be afraid of tho t'orm, but what they were really, concerned with was not a name, but the progress of reform. ,

The Freehold. The statement that tho Bill was an attack on the freehold was preposterous. The fullest protection was given to every existing freehold, and the freehold tenure, if anything, was. being extended by giving the lease in perpetuity settlors the right of purchase. It was'not true, so far as.the Government | was concerned, that the leasehold was being advocated'as the only proper tenure for all times and countries.. The freehold was, under some circumstances, a necossary form of tenure. In the earliest stages Of its development, a-country might have to offer to prospective settlers the fullest inducements, including tho freehold tenure. At such times land was a drag in tho market and population was the great need. But it was one thing to make that: admission and quite another thing to say that the freehold should now be parted with in this country. A great change had taken place since those early days, and' the national needs had begun to press on the land that was available, Society and (.and Values. Moreover, this colony, now Dominion, had spent millions of money on public works. Jliight millions had been spent in this very way during tho last five years. That increased tho value of/land. Five millions had been spent in tho purchase of land for settlements. Of the total of one million acres of these lands there was three million pounds' worth of unearned increment. Should the State go on spending million after million on'public works and thus adding to the value of every •acre of land in the country and not take a share of the unearned increment? People were beginning to see that society was in a large measure tho maker of land values—in many cases to a greater extent tlinn\thc individual. In this country, where the State extended its activities in every direction, it was a greater creator of land values than elsewhere. The Bill had been framed to recognise tho interests both of the individual and the State, and it marked a greater step forward in the direction taken by Air. Kolleston and Sir John M'Konzie than had been taken in any Bill that had found a passage through Parliament. Points of tiic Bill. The Attornev-Gonoral, proceeding, reviewed the leading features of the Bill. He thought

all would agree with the abolition of the lease in perpetuity, and-that the renewable lease, would bo regarded as a satisfactory suhstituto. The concession of.the. freehold at tho. present value, was n reasonable thing from the point of view of the State. He expected good results from the representation of the Crown tenants on the Land Boards. It had been found that the representatives of tho landowners, who were now given a place on tho Assessment Courts, had done their duty thoroughly and conscientiously. This was shown by the fact that they had ill many cases increased the valuations, whereas it might have, been expected by some people that they would be especially generous to the owners. Tho representatives of the Crown tenants on the. Land Boards would doubtless bo equally fair and conscientious. He regarded the clause which made the valuation for taxing purposes the basis of compensation on compulsory acquisition of estates as one of the most important features of the Bill. The present method of assessing compensation was very expensive. Tho landowners of any district held together, so that it was difficult for the Government to get export witnesses. These estates had, therefore, cost the community thousands of pounds more, than they otherwise would. He behoved the new system would not work out at all unfavourably to the landowner.

Not the Last Word. He did not for a moment claim that this Bill was the last word on the land question. They could only take ono step at a time. Tho Government had done its best, honestly and strenuously, to carry out what the Ministers believed to be best in the interests of the great masses of tho people. (Applause.) Friendly Criticism. : Tho Hon. W. W. M'Cardle (Auckland) congratulated the Minister for Lands on the measure. Ho reviewed the history of land legislation in'tho Dominion. He did not approve of the clause for giving elective- members on the Land Boards, especially in view of tho inadequacy of the allowance made for expenses.' Tho Land Commission had reported that tho allowance was far too small, and the Land Boards Conference had recommended that 21s. a day should bo allowed, as against 10s. at present granted. With regard to preference at the ballot, the single man should not be in any way handicapped, as there were lands, like those in the King Country, which would not be taken up by any other class. Ho advocated more adequate loading of Crown lands for road-making. He thoughtthe State, in giving the l.i.p. settlers the right of purchase, might have been satisfied with less than the present. value of the land, seeing that the tenure, was nearly as good as a freehold ror the settler, ami the Stato was only getting 4 interest on the original capital value. .Tho time for payment might also have been extended. Ho was opposed to allowing the settler to buy the freehold of. land for settlement lands..

Tho debate was interrupted by the 5 o'clock adjournment. , When tho Council resumed at 8 p.m., Tho Hon. W. W. M'Cardlo continued his speech. Ho said he approved of the provisions for relaxing the cropping and other restrictions on payment by the tenant of 33 per cent, of the capital value, r.nd thought they should bo extended to o.r.p. settlers, some of whom, in the back-blocks, wero much harassed by the rangers. Mr. M'Cardlo again referred to the necessity of proper roadmg, ar.d alluded to certain roads and tracks that had been made in tho King Country in, the midst of bush and isolated from other tracks, or through nativo lands, where they could be of no .use. Ho urged that an inquiry should bo held into these matters. A Leaseholder's Praise. The Hon. J. T. Paul said that what was leasehold in tho Bill was right, and what was freehold in it was wrong, but ho gavo the Minister for Lands credit for keeping abreast of public opinion, and getting into his Hill more of what he believed to bo right than either Mr. Rolleston cr Sir John M'Kons'.io. lie Commended the Government fpr reducing tho' term of the lease on settlement lands. ,It would be hypoc'.isy on his part to say that tho Bill was nn advance on last-year's Bill, but'it was certainly an'advance on the previous position. The 999 years' lease, .which he did not defend, had one good point in that it prevented aggregation. The history of frceho'i" was aggregation. The Bill embodied a good deal of what .was recommended by the Land Commission. No one had yet pointed out the effect regarding the payment of land tax created by the provision for the'repayment by tenants of 90' per cent, of the capital value of their holdings. It seemed to him that the tenant who did this would become liable for the payment of land tax in respect of that 90 per cent. Ho hoped th'fe Attorney-General would touch on this point. . ; , The Hon. F. Trask said he thought very, few holders of lease-iii-perpetuitywould elect to convert'at the present value, except those who had only been a short time in occupation, "and who would therefore be purchasing practically at tho original value. He approved, of tho Bill as a whole. The debate was adjourned until' Thursday >on the motion of the Hon. J. Anstey. NEW BILL. Tho Attorney-General gave notice to introduce tho Town Districts Bill. - The Council roso at 9.30 p.m.