PARLIAMENTARY.

Gisborne Times, Volume XXV, Issue 2202, 4 October 1907, Page 2

PARLIAMENTARY.

Press Association

LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL. Tho Council mot at 2.30 p.m LAND TAX BILL.

Tho Land and Income Tax Assessment Act Amendment Bill from tho other I-louso was read a first time, and the second reading was fixed for Tuesday noxt. FIRE BRIGADES.

Mr. Goorgo resumed the debate on tho Firo Brigades Bill. He was opposed to tho principle of tho Bill, as ho held that insurance companies should not bo called upon to support brigades. Ho contended that instead of bringing down patchwork amendments the Government should have repealed tho Act, which was a disgrace to tho Statute Book, and introduced an entirely now measure. Under tho Act tho Government should have paid £4Ol to Wellington, and now they proposed to pay £250 a year. Exclusive of tho chief centres fifteen districts were already created, and even with the population limitation of 5000 proposed it would bo possible to create under tho new Bill 31 Boards. His estimate of tho cost was £50,000 a year, and yet the Government proposed to contribute only £ISOO. The profits of insurance companies to-day, ho declared, were only 6 per cent, out of which they had to pay dividends, and they were asked now to contribute 5 per cent of their premiums, leaving themselves only one per cent. This meant that rates must be raised or tho companies must cease to exist. Regarding tho clause dealing with Government contributions, he would move, when the Bill was in committee, that the Government contribution be one-seventh, the balance to be found by the companies and municipalities concerned. He asked, how were they to get at outside companies for contributions—Lloyds, for instance? Lloyds would be able to do underwriting at a lower rate than New Zealand companies. Clause 8, empowering Boards to borrow, was a most exeraordinary clause, intended to enable Boards to obtain an overdraft to start upon, but what bank would give them an overdraft at 5 per cent ? Tho clause should be eliminated. He criticised the clause respecting’ payment by the Board for plant and property taken over, and contended that boards should get Jplant and property used for fire-extinguish-ing purposes free. Mr Wigram hoped to see the Bill amended when before the Statutes Revision Committee. He considered that the Government should contribute as much as the companies were called upon to pay. He drew attention to several points which would require special attention when before Committee.

Mr Callan agreed with Mr George that last year’s Bill should be repealed and an entirely new Act provided. The present Bill was unsatisfactory, as it was a more patcliing-up of the measure. There was no question of principle involved in it. Tho Attorney-General, replying, said the objections raised could be threshed out by tho Committee to which it was proposed to refer it There was no principle to discuss, tho principle having been affirmed in the Act to which this Bill was an amendment. With regard to Mr George’s statement as to Government contributions, the City of Wellington Fire Brigade asked for £212 per year as a contribution, and the Government gave £250. He refuted the contention that the Government should contribute as much as the municipality of Wellington, as the contribution by the Government came, not out of the pockets of the citizens, but out of those of the people of tho country.

The second reading was agreed to and the Bill referred to a joint Statutes Revision Committee. BUSINESS FRAUDS.

The Police Offences Bill was taken in Committee.

The. Attorney-General moved a new clause to the effect that every person commits an offence and is liable to a fine not exceeding £2O who publicly uses in connection with his business or calling words or initials leading to a supposition contrary to fact that he holds a degree, diploma or certificate of any university or other institution, tho burden of proof in ally prosecution to fall upon the Department. Registered medical practitioners using tlie title . “Doctor” . are exempted from tho above provisions. The clause was agreed to with the proviso moved by Mr Callan, that no prosecution take place without the consent of the Attorney-General. The Bill was reported. The Council rose at 4.40 p.m.

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES. The House met at 2.30 p.m. , LAND TAX DIVISION. . Messrs Parata and Hogg explained that they called for a division on the third reading of the Land and Income Assessment Bill, not because they were opposed to the Bill, but merely in order that the names . of : members who opposed the Bill might be recorded on the journals of the House. CIVIL SERVICE REFORM. Mr. Hogg continued the debate on the question that leave bo given to Mr. Barclay to bring in a Public Service Reform Bill, which was interrupted by the dinner adjournment on Wednesday. He expressed himself as favorable to granting politics' freedom to all employees of the State, but thought State servants should avoid indulging too freely in party polities. Mr. Bonnet moved the previous question, with a viow to determining the debate. This was seconded by Mr. Kidd. Mr. Massey protested against the attempt to prevent discussion of what was an important question. It was, ho said, an attempt to gag Parliament ; and lie characterised the tactics as contemptible. The Premier said the prosed ire of speaking at length on tho first reading of a Bill was unusual, and if the question was to bo discussed it shorn*! be done on the second reading. '1 he Government desired to go one with tho Land Bill, and not to debate a measure which would not settle the matter ono way or the other. Tl <rc was no gagging about bis suggestion. The previous question was lost by 37 to 29, and tho debate pro-ceded Mr Jennings thought civil servants should liavo freedom to express tlieir political views; Mr. Izard thought the House wrs not the place to ventilate Mr. McCullough’s case, but it should go before the Railway Appeal Board. Mr. Lewis, with tho object of killing the Bill, moved that it bo road a first time this day six mouths. He considered that civil servants lad bad a greater influence on the affairs of the colony than their numbers justified ■' Mr Fisher read a -opy of 1 lie letter ho had forwarded to rile Minister for Railways in June. 1905, referring to Mr. McCullough's taking an active part in politics, and requesting that all Civil Servants should be put on the same footing. The Minister had replied that the matter was being looked into He hoped the Government had deeided to put Mr. McCullough out of the service, but if not he loped tiny intended to cancel tho reguMtions under which Mr. McCmV) u;h had been suspended. The Premier, replying < o Mr. Fisher, said the Governms it bad never giv*en an indication that a member' of tile Civil Service had no right, to mention a case or ask a question of a member of Parlament, as a Civil Servant bad every light to ask a question of a member of Parliament. Ho reiterated his statement that in Mr. McCullough’s, as in other cases, the Government acted impartially. Mi’. T. Mackenzie said that too much preference had been given Ho political views, and too little - to ability ill making appointments to thCivil Service during the past 13 years.

Mr. Major considered that Civil Servants should not take an acme part in politics. He*-added that in almost every case of alleged grievance made to him by Civil Servants he had found their statements groundless. Mr. W. Fraser contended that tho regulations were, framed in the interest of preserving discipline’in departments, and the Government must see that the regulations wore observed.

Mr. Flatman pointed out that the Bill would not affect Mr. McCullough’s case in any way unless made retrospective. The motion to kill the Bill was lost on the voices. After Mr. Barclay had replied the first reading of the Bill was agreed to by 48 to 19. Tho House adjourned at 5.30 p.m. Tho House resumed at 7.30 p.m.

THE LAND BILL, Mr. McNab, in moving me second reading of tho Land Laws Amendment Bill, said it differed much from the measure introduced last session. He congratulated members on the massing of the Assessment Act, which, le said, went much further than tho provisions contained in his Bill of last year. He desired to draw members’ attention to the clauses ffoing away with tho lease-in-perpetuity system. During tho time that the system was in existence there had been taken out 7528 leases, with an area of 1,605,850 acres, and a capital value of £1,409,485. He added that the total l.i.p. leases were 11,298, with 2,283,765 acres; of a total capital value of £5,528,547. One of the points which was going to arise in tho future was that of the interest of tenants under the 999 years lease, which is increasing year by year. He said that in the future people would come to look upon them merely as tenants, and they in turn would seek to turn their leaseholds into freeholds, and consequently the time would be when there would be no leaseholders. On that account he asked the House to do away with leaseholds which were only so in'name and constitute in their place a term of 66 years’ renewable lease. He 'knew some members considered that it was too long a term, but there were various classes of lands in which a fair return could not be obtained in a few years. He believed the problem would* occur in the future when the 32 years’ leases were expiring, and he would ask the House if it could not give these people a better system of Tease with perpetual right of renewal. The terms of the Bill, he contended, were absolutely fair. The Crown appointed an arlfitrator and the tenant did likewise, and these two in turn appointed a third. Improvements were, defined under the Act of 1892 as \%ere the rights of the tenant, but under this BUI the Government went further, in the direction of granting tenants the right to improvements. A record of the class of land in its original state would be available to ihe Crown and tho tenant at aU times, and would go a long way to arriving at a fair assessment. He particularly desired to call membors’ attention to clause 15, which applied to mineral leases. Clause 16 allowed all tenaute to pay in sums of £lO up to 90 per cent of the capital value, so that when repayments had been made up to 50 per cent of the capital value the rent was reduced one-half. Proceding, he said that under certain conditions a farmer could carry on his farm in a satisfactory manner, but under other conditions this might not be possible, so that under the provisions of this Bill a man who paid up to 50 per cent of the capital value could carry on his farm under whatever conditions or system he liked. Under the Land for Settlements Act many applications were made for genuine settlement, and the percentage of refusals after inquiry by the Land Board was small. Under thisBUI preference was to be given to landless applicants, and the definition of landless was embodied under section 48, and preference was granted under section 49 to other classes of applicants, while section 50 gave preference after landless and other applicants had been decided to formerly unsuccessful applicants. He added that it was proposed to allow holders of leascMn-perpetuity to convert to the renewable lease, and so obtain the benefit of cheaper rent. He also intended in committee to bring down a clause to allow holders of leases in mining districts to convert to renewable' leases. Proceeding, he said provisions were made in the Bill to admit of a leaseholder acquiring the freehold by arbitration, as against the provision under last year’s Bill that he could obtain it at auction. He contended that after granting these conditions it was advisable to prevent the selling of properties that would lead to aggregation of estates, and he thought that he would be in a position to submit clauses which would have the effect of keeping these freehold properties separate and distinct for all time. He would also ask for these clauses to bo put into operation for . all transfers of land from the Crown after this measure was put on the Statute Book. Clause 24 provided for tifpealing of declaration under schedules of the principal Act, and under clause 27 provision was made to xjrevent the transfer of leases until , tho lessee had resided continuously, on his lease for two years. Section 29 provided for division of land into three classes, so as to admit of extended areas of third-class lands being held. Clause 31 provided'that all applications for unsurveyed land should bo advertised. Section 38 provided that only one run could be. held except on the recommendation of the Board .with the approval of the Minister. Clause 39 provided that the holder of a pasturage lease or license may cultivate portion of his run. Under the Land for Settlements section the term of the lease was to be 33 years, with perpetual right of renewal.

Sir. Massey said Mr. McNab had put one side of the que'Mon, and it was for him (Mr. MasS-M to put the other. He denied that the main proposals of last year’s Bill were contained in the Land and Income Assessment Bill passed the previous night, as asserted by Mr. MoNab. Ho contended that Mr. McNab had “climbed down” from his attitude of the Bill of last year, by admission of tho right of tho leaseholder to acquire the "freehold. Ho contended that tho valuator coming along at the expiry of the leases would mean confiscation of improvements and increasing of rent, as everything depended on the valuators’ recommendation in the assessing of tlie rent for the new. lease. Ho added that existing conditions would be more acceptable to tenants. He scathingly attacked the clause relating,to minerals, and contended that it would bo far bettor for the country to grant the freehold, so that the settler would do all possible in tho wav of placing improvements on the land and developing his land. He did not think any settler under the 999 years’ lease would convert to either the 66 or 33 years’ renewable lease. He maintained that the 999 years’ lease, with all its disadvantages, was far preferable to the 66 or 33 years’ lease. The thin end of the wedge of freehold had been inserted, and ho added .that it was for the Opposition to drive the wedge homo as firmly as possible, so that every settler or resident iu a rural distniot should ' bo able to possess the freehold of his land. He contended that they should be allowed to acquire the freehold at original value. He-added that- this country was paying more for its borrowed capital than it was obtaining from its settlers, consequently they were losing on the 999 years’ leases. He asserted that the reversion of interest on these leaseholds was practically worthless, as not a member in the House would give one sovereign for- any 999 years’ lease. Proceeding, lie maintained that the provisions of the Bill in regard to leaseholders acquiring the freehold were impossible. He added that the prospects of closer settlement would be much .improved by giving the leaseholder an easier mode of acquiring the freehold. This country should eneourago a class of small farmers, each cultivating his own property, and lie contended that this desired encouragement was

koine given under the BiU. Under ■Uio Act of 1900 provision was inudo in acquiring land compulsorily to grant compensation for loss of business, ibut not so under this Bill, clearlv showing that it was not intended to encourago or recompense a man for his enterprise and energy, deferring to re-valuation 'at the expiration of leasehold, lie contended that the settler would neglect his fences and farm generally, so that he could get 'his lease renewed at as cheap a rent as possible. If, on the other hand, he desired to leavo his lease, then he would put everything spick and span so that he could get the highest possible value for his improvements. He added that- Mr. McNab might bo Minister for Lands, but ho was certainly Minister -for Settlement. He contended that hardly a session came round 'but what some attempt was made to weaken the position of the man on the land. Last year the Minister was wanting to go too far, and had found it necessary to back down. Referring to the tender system, he saikl he did not like , it, and urged that they should go back to the ballot system, but they should draft a clause to protect it from the machinations of speculators and jobbers. Ho added that if we prevented these gamblers wo would have done more in the interests of settlement than has been done for the past dozen years. The Premier explained that the Bill had been divided as from last year, so that members could be given an opportunity of voting on the separate items, and tho advantages of this course had been shown on the previous night, when the House practically unanimously supported the third reading of the Assessment Bill. Referring to the freehold, ho said that under this measure l,(>od,B£>o acres of Crown lands were available for converting to this tenure, and the whole of the Crown lands held under optional system were also opon to freehold tenure, whilst certain reservations wero made under another Bill for leasehold tenure. One of the reasons that tho Land for Settlements leases wero not placed in the same position as l.i.p. was that for years to come tho Government would have to coutinuc to purchase estates under this system, and it was necessary to provide legislation to guard against these lands being again aggregated with its consequent evils. He added that they wore not continuing tho optional system, but with the assistance of lion, members it was hoped to do a great deal in tho direction of settling the land difficulties of this colony. He added that the purchase of estates was earned out in tho interests of the country, Ho refuted Mr. Massey’s statement that money so borrowed was a loss to the State, as sinco 1897 a profit had been realised to the State of £277,288. Proceeding, ho said taey could not assess the value to this country of the placing of seton the land, as this developed the land and increased tho wealth and_ prosperity of the country. Referring to Mr. Massey’s statement that every purchaser of freehold was an opponent to Socialism, he said that- when this country went in for State railways it adapted State Socialism, and under this Bill it was proposed by Stato Socialism to grant leaseholders the right to acquire the freehold. (Mr. Massoy: that is individualism.) The Premier, continuing, said it was also State Socialism. Ho contended that a man, placed on tho land ten years ago without any capital was now clamoring for tho freehold. He added that there wero many men without land and capital at the present time desirous of getting on the land, and they should be given the same opportunity of making homes for themselves as was given to their predecessors ten years ago. • referring to “dummying, said it was an interesting study to not© how this had developed during the last few years, and-he contended that the ballot system was just in practice. He did not infer that the great bulk of the applications came from dummies, but he contended that there were a fair percentage of dummy applications made. Mr. Mills said that before the Opposition started to agitate for the freehold very few of the holders of lease-iuiperpetiiiity desired to acquire the freehold. He added that (he believed .in the optional system. Mr. W. Fraser contended that the optional system as contained in the Bill was of a very reserved and farcical nature. He added that he' did not like .the re-valuation proposal. Neither did men in the country like it,

Mr. Malcolm said that whilst a freeholder he was opposed to the Bill, because it still contained elements of land nationalisation.

-Mr. Reid urged that better provision should be made to encourage settlers to search for minerals on their lands. Mr. Flatm-an considered the 66 years’ lease too long.

JOTTINGS.

(Special to Times.) WELLINGTON. Oct. 3. Mr. Rutherford thinks it is only a question of time when graduated tax limitation in New Zealand under the present Bill will bo reduced from £40,000 to £20,000. Mr. Herries regards the Land Tax Bill as the first fruits of a readjustment in the system of taxation throughout tho colony. “I doubt,” ho said, “if the Minister for Education (Mr. Powlds) would regard it as the first instalment of single tax ” The Premier: “He has not said s>.” Mr. Herries: “No, he has not srid 30 like Brer Rabbit, but he has been . lying low—very low indeed—both during tho discussion on this Bill, and also on tho Tariff.” “I have often,” said Mr. Poolo yesterday, “been looked upon as a runaway American” (“Hear, hear,” interjected Mr. Massey, amidst laughter). “I happen, however,” continued Mr. Poole, “to come from the same country as the Leader of tho Opposition.”