PERIOD EXTENDED

Hawke's Bay Herald-Tribune, Volume 81, Issue 2, 25 September 1937, Page 3

PERIOD EXTENDED

— Pres» Associaiion.)

Minister Explains Exemption of New Flats FULFILLING A PURPOSE

(By Telegraph-

WELLINGTON. Last Night. -The House proeeeded with the second reading of the Fair Rents Amendment Bill, the Prime 'Minister asking for the co-operation of the House in getting the Bill through all stages by September 30. Moving the second reading of the Bill, the Minister of Justice (Hon. H. G. B. Mason) said the main purpose of the measure was to extend the period of the Act, which would otherwise expire. Beferring to the question of bringing . within the scope of- the Bill those flats which had not been previously covered, he said it would be a very serious mis-' take LU' to do 'so. All would agree that if the parties could arrange their own affairs it was much better that tbey should do so. They wanted no restrictions that could be avoided, and the onus was on those desiring restrictions to show they were necessary. Grea't activity in the bnilding of flats was being shown in Auckland, and. it was true to say that flat conStruction was a very important part of the building of dwellings. To xestrict the letting of those flats . would be to impose a check . on enterprise, which -was doing something to xelieve the housing situation, and defeat the main purpose in view, namely, that of providipg -proper dwellings for the people. The legislation was designed to protect those people who were not in the best position to protect themselves. If theintention was to relieve that position, -nothing should be done.to diseourage the building of houses and, consequently, ( the amending Bill " did not in.' any way covei new dwellings or blocks of flats.' If new flats were included, it would certqinly diseourage, if not entirely block, the creation of such buildings " and thereby intensify the housing position and defeat the very purpose which they all had in wishing to see the people properly housed. Would Affect riat-Building . Some people in flats, he said, thought they should be brought within the Bill, but he thought the little relief granted one or two in that connection would be at the expense of a considerable amount of building and would bring overcrowding and unsocial conditions upon a very much larger number of people. Colonel J. Hargest: ls the position very different materially from the building of new houses? The Minister: So far as the. law is concerned they are both outside the Bill, and it would lead to confusion of thought and anxiety if we talked about including new flats. The Opposition will be doing a bad turn to the people of the Dominion from the point of view of housing if they create' alarm in regard to the bnilding of flats. Let flats - go up and relieve housing conditions. Hon. J. G. Cobbe asked why, if new ( flats, built as such, were exempted from the provisions of the Bill, houses turned into flats should not be exempted. He suggested that the Minister shoujd exeinpt suitable large buildings which had been converted into flats'. Mr H. S. Kyle asked if there were a real housing shortage or 'had the ppsition been met by the Governmen.t's ■ housing policy. Speaking of the .Fair Eents Act, he said there seemed. to be one law operating for the . Government and another for the private individual. Where the Government held . a -large mortgage on a property vhere was not' much protection for tenants whoso' rents had been raised, but if a privata person held the mortgage, rents had been reduced by the Courts. In fact, he added, some of the private hiortgagc holders were getting it in the neck, and the' Government seemed out to squash private enterprise in building. Hon. G. W. Forbes said he would ask the Minister whether the Act were being administered in the interests of both thosq who invested their money in- property and also the tenants. Mr W. J. Polson said the Minister did not -now seem to be so optirdistic about the efEects of the measure as he had been. when he introduced the original Fair Bents Bill last year. Then, said Mr Polson, the Minister had stated the Act would not be necessary for .much more than a year, and that.it would tend to accelerate the Government 's building policy, but it could not' have been the success the Minister had claimed it, would be. The effiect had been to close down private house building and, in fact, it had had the opposite eft'ect to that outlined by the Minister. With regard to the question of flats, lie urged that there should fce.. no dis- !' crimination between the types of flats mentioned by previous speakers. Why i. not cut out all flats froin mention ia I tlie Bill and thus avoid discriminatiou, which always crcated tronble?, , To accept his suggestion would be an oscape from an intolera'ble .position and ;enerally clear up a very sticky busiicss. • Mr S. G. Smith pointed out that the ,osition had altered since last. year, and' i ates had been increased considerably J .u many cases, thus causing cortsider- j .ble embarrassment to tbe landlord. : Hon. H. T. Atmore objected to the ■ ■xemption of flats and said he would aka to see a clause included including all flats built. If they were exempted they would be built to evade the regulations covering olhcr dwellings. I'ersonally, he would like to see every mau with a dwelling surrounded by its own bit of garden. The Bill was a retrograde step. The Minister, replying to Mr Atmore, oaid if people wanted to live iu flats there was no reason why they should uo t do. 19 and thus Jeavs jiousoa vacanfc

for others. .The effect of the administration of the Act was that it did not prevent rents being raised in proper circumstances. A number of cases had come before the Court and rents had been reduced. The Minister referred to the excellent consideration shown by the majority of landlords for their tenants during the slump, and the provisions qf the Act were not based on the ac-tions of the average landlord, or even the great majority of them. In ref erring to Mr. Polson 'a objections to tbs Bill, he said the best judge of whether he was sincere or not was known to the member for Stratford himself. Mr Polson Objects to Afrback The Bill was read a second time and the House went into committee. Mr Polson said the attack by the Minister upon him did not seem to correspond with the Prime Minister 's appeal to the Opposition for co-opera-tion in putting the Bill through before the end of the month. He said he had not asked much time of the House, but he assured the Minister that if the Opposition was going to be subjected to a hectoring attitiide, it was not the correct manner to elicit ihe Opposition 's co-o^peration. The Act wflnld create hardship, and it would mean that tvirtually the State would beeome the only owner of houses. Then God help the tenants. Mr H. S. Kyle said he had received letters of complaint concerning the operation of the Act from many sources. "I am not going to be browbeaten by the Minister of Justice either," he said. An interjector: Has he bullied you, toof Mr Kyle: No; he is not a bully. Oh, no. He is ^ very meek and xaild, but since he became Minister of Justice he knQws he has the police force behind .him. (L'aughter.^ The Chairman of Committees (Mr E. J. Howard): The hon. member must speak to the Bill. ; ... . . Mr. Kyle proeeeded. to ask if a tenant 'who wished his rent to be reduced was "forced to go to ,'Court for relief. The 'Minister: Yes; but the Labour Department takes up the case for the tenant, evten against the Crown. The Bill passed through the committee stage • without amendment and passed the third reading. "AskeA abbut t&e forthcoming business of the House, the Prime Minister said the'Arbitration Amendment Bill would be taken on Tuesday.-The Budget would be brought down on Tuesday night, and on Wednesday afternoon he had thoughl they might have a discussion on ques' tions arising from the Imperial Gonfer ence. The House rose at 5.5 p.m. until 2.3C p.m. on Tuesday.