RURAL CREDITS BILL

Gisborne Times, Volume LXI, Issue 9851, 1 November 1924, Page 3

RURAL CREDITS BILL

“BOLSHEYTK IN CONCEPTION. ’ ’

GENERAL CONDEMNATION. WELLINGTON, Oct. 30. The Rural Credits Bill introduced by the Government in the dying hours cf the session is generally condemned even by those in whose interest it is supposed to have been- introduced-. ! Th© Farmers’ Union is not satisfied, | because it does net go far enough | ai3cl the commercial community thinks ! it is a dangerous measure savouring jof class legislation. Several c.ommcrj oial communities think it a danger- ' ous measure savouring of class legislation. Several commercial and financial authorities were interviewed by “The Post” to-day on the Farm Land Mortgage Associations Bill. None of them had more than the newspaper precis of the measure to go upon in j forming an opinion, but from what ! they learned 1 from those; sources of information' -all were quite clear that the measure .was in the nature ol pledging the whole people iiv the- interests of a section'. A!! agreed that the Bill, if it became law, would set up a vicious and dangerous precedent. One gentleman remarked: “'We could -expect this kind of thing from, the Communists but from the present Government it is inexplicable. The country is to lend farmers, and farmers only, anything up to £150,000 for ten years, and to lend them that sum free' of interest. The Association may also ba immune from income tax. This Bill is an outrage on the intelligence of people outside of the Legislative Chambers.” Another authority on finance said : “T would like to have the Bill, but so far as I have read' its. features through the papers. I think it has not -a. chance of going through. For one thing it will, not satisfy the appetite of the farmers for cheap money, and plenty of it. What is £150,000'? That is the limit to them. They want hundreds of thousands. I see that the money to bo adv-arloed is to be taken from the Consolidated Fund. That is, the whole community is to lend money to the farmers free of interest. The tiling is positively absurd. Why should the taxpayers of the country do this for a section of the country? Why not provide capital free of interest to the merchant, shopkeeper ap'd manufacturer? If to one section, why not all alike? Again, if the Government is to lend money to these associations free of interest, what about the advances to settlers j and other lending departments of the ! Government who 1 arc charging 6 per j cent, for their loans to farmers ? How j and where will thev stand? I notice; that the applicant for a loan through j these proposed associations is to receive an advance up to 70 per cent, of ; his capital value, but he must take . up a £5 share in every £IOO. Does; he get that £5 deducted from his ad- , vaiice? If he does, then he receives only 65 per eoivb. advance of the capital* value of the property mortgaged, j Then what becomes of that £-5 share, ; and where does it go when he ceases to be a shareholder on completion of payment of the advance made t-o him? I would like to carefully study . the Bill itself before expressing, more j than I have said already, hut on the. ! face of it it seems an absurd proposal, - brought in for the purpose of catch- . ing the votes of farmers. I imagin'© some of them -are too wary lords to . be caught with such stuff.” . ' j A banker expressed no opinion on the measure, .but he remarked that if . the ■Government would lend each.of, the banks trading in'the Dominion £150,030 on. the same terms as it was proposed to lend money to the Farm Land Mortgage Association no doubt the banks would be prepared to lend settlers money or. the terms provided for in the Bill and would gladly do , so. j

“This legislation,” remarked another accepted authority oh trade finance, “is out r.nd out class lrgisJation. The Government proposes a maximum of £150,000 but will it stop there? Not a hit. If the Government intends to lend to one section of the people (the farmers) large sums of money free of interest-, why not to every other section ? T lie whole idea is essentially Bolshevik in conception, to put. it mildly. It is class legislation of the worst possible description. I see no provision is made for tire payment of income tax by those associations. Why not? Why should they escape and the individual taxpayer keep up to the mark? If the hanks were immune from income tax I am assured that they could reduce t.licir rate by 1 per cent. I wonder whether the Government is really in earnest- -about the Bill. It seems so utterly absurd; so glaringly a piece of out. and out class legislation and never intended to be proceeded with.’’Special.