PARLIAMENT

Evening Star, Issue 23378, 22 September 1939, Page 2

PARLIAMENT

SMALL FARMS BILL ELIMINATION OF FREEHOLD CHALLENGED [From Our Parliamentary Re porter.] WELLINGTON, September 21. Three more Government Bills of comparatively small importance were passed in the House of Representatives yesterday, while members still await the war finance legislation. The Small Farms Amendment, in charge of the Minister of Lands, Mr Langstone, provoked long discussion, maintained principally -by Nationalist members, who saw in its provision a further attack on the freehold tenure. They failed in committee to get the clauses deleted to which they took objection. There was a bright interlude when the Leader of the Opposition made reference to time-wasting proceedings bn what he termed “ chicken feed,” the Acting Prime Minister _ retorting with ironic assurance that if the Government considered the debates too tedious the remedy lay in the application of the closure. However, Opposition members generously contributed to the discussions, which included strong advocacy of a campaign for advertising the remarkable qualities of Tauranga _ lemons. When they suggested that this ought to commence at once, Mr Fraser reminded them that the campaign appeared to have already begun. The day's work comprised the passing of the Small Farms Amendment, the Nurses and Midwives’ Registration Amendment, the Agricultural Emergency Regulations Confirmation Bills, and there are still minor Government Bills for consideration pending the appearance of the financial measure, which is expected next week, A strong protest against the elimination of the rights of settlors on small farms to obtain the freehold of their properties was voiced by Mr Grigg, Mid-Canterbury, and many other Nationalist members, when the Small Farms Amendment Bill was under discussion. Mr Grigg said the right to the freehold was one of the privileges held by a democratic people. It was a principle that should he closely guarded. The principle had been firmly established in New Zealand, and the Government required good reason before taking away rights that had been given to the people by its predecessors. The Minister of Lands had offered the excuse that the occupiers of small farms were not exercising their right to acquire the freehold. This was not a sound argument. Because people were not acquiring the freehold to-day _it could not be said they would not_ desire to own farms at some time in the future. Their right to exercise their privilege when it best suited them .to do so should not be taken away. Beneath the surface of the statement that had been made by the Minister could be detected the Government’s policy, added Mr Grigg. The freehold was "to be eliminated. This principle was seen in the State housing scheme, under which people were being provided with houses, but not with homes. Unless the people owned their houses they could not regard them as their homes. The same principle was being extended to email farms. When the Bill was in committee there were two opportunities to challenge clauses which, if deleted, would have retained the right to the freehold, but the Opposition amendments were defeated on party lines. LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL [Per United Press Association.] WELLINGTON, September 21. When the Legislative Council met this afternoon the Otago Presbyterian Church Board of Property Amendment Bill was read a first time. The Hutt Road Bill, the New Zealand Library Association Bill, the Otago Harbour Board Empowering Bill, the Auckland City Empowering Bill, and the Appropriation Bill were put through their remaining stages and passed. The Council adjourned at, 3.50 until Tuesday.