THE HOUSING BILL

Dominion, Volume 14, Issue 29, 29 October 1920, Page 8

THE HOUSING BILL

' PASSED BY'THE HOUSE

LABOUii AMENDMENTS REJECTED

Tho Housing Bill occupied the attention of the House of Representatives until 3 o'clock yesterday • morning. It was eventually passed without material amendment.

The Minister of Labour, replying at 1M a.m., said that the Housing 'Department was by no means inactive. It had chartered three scows to transport timh|jr. It ,had arranged to import roofing iron, and had placed- orders for doors and other materials. The Department had proceeded to make its own arrangements as soon as it found that the contract system wan not satisfactory. The Housing Department was a special branch of the Labour Department, and had its own 'officers, and experts. Kegarding the Miramar contracts, the Department had b<;en served with notice of a Supreme Court action, and the matter "had better be thrashed out there. The solicitors who were moving in the matter were acting for one of the sureties. The Government was prepared to order an inquiry* if th» threatened action did not proceed. Members had urged that the limit of iIO.OOO to be advanced to a borough in any one year should be increased. The liability was already 4 large one, but ho was prepared to consult the Minister of Finance on the point. Thie inclusion of harbour Boards was not an easy matter, since these bonrds did not possess rating powers." The Government must have some security for its money. He agreed that if houses ware lying empty the Government should hav|> tho chance of purchasing them for the benefit of the workers. ' Thte justification for the amended scheme of rent lystriction, allowing the net rent to be 7 percent., was to be found in the empty houses. Th;i owners of houses were all anxious to sell and not to let. • When the Bill was committed, Labour members objected to ithe proposal to allow the owner of a house to receive rent at the rate of 7 per cent, on the present capital value, ' clear _of all chargos. 1 They argufd that this would mean a charge of not less than 1.1 P cr cent, after depreciation and other charges had beten deducted, and would impose hardship on many people. Mr. Mossev: It will ( encourage the builders and provide more houses. Sir William Herries said that most of the houses in tt» cities were crwivid by people who were not rich. He had been told heartrending . stori-r* of widows and others who had invested their. savings in houses, and were now receiving less than 5 per cent, on their money. A net return of 7 per cent, on house property was not unreasonable. The House divided on clause 15, which fixes the maximum rent at 7 per cent, net on the present capital value, ilie clause was rotained by 31 votes to 1— Mr Young (Waikato) move.d to make clause 17, forbidding the demand or payment of bonuses, applicable to licensed premises. The amendment was defeated on the voices. Mr. Mitchell (Wellington South) suggested an amendment proposing that house-owners should be required to give notice to the Housing Department within . twenty-four hours of any house becoming vacant. If the house was still vacant at the end of fourteen days, the Department should have a right to put in n tenant, subject to the right of tlie owner to'anpeal to a Magistrate. The Minister undertook to consider 'this suggestion. ' An amendment moved by Mr. Parry (Auckland Central) proposing a census of unoccupied or partially occupied houses was ruled out of order -as involving public expenditure. Mr. Fraser '.Wellington Central) suggested t'hab the rent restriction law should be extended to premises occupied ns combined dwelling-houses and shops. He said that some landlords were exploiting tenants by insisting that the front portions of houses should lie let as shops. • The amendment was defeated on the voices, the Minister undertaking to look into the matter. Mv. Fraser suggested the adoption of the provision of the British law that a tenant should not be evicted until alternative accommodation had been provided. He said that the "undue hardship" clause w,as not an adequate protection for tenants. The amendment was defeated by 30' votes to 14.

Tho Bill was reported at 2.50 a.m., with unimportant amendments, read a third time and passed.