LAND SALES BILL

Hauraki Plains Gazette, Volume 52, Issue 32309, 6 September 1943, Page 5

LAND SALES BILL

(To the Editor.)

Sir, —I find little to commend the criticism of the Land Sales Bill by Mr A. S. Sutherland, M.P., for Hauraki .reported at some length by your paper on August 25. The member for Hauraki has completely failed to produce one single argument that would have the effect of improving the bill. Instead he has merely reiterated the ‘tedious repetition, the opponents of the Bill indulged in during the recent Parliamentary debate. .Explaining the Bill in detail the 'Prime Minister, the Rt. Hon. Mr Peter Fraser, said that the measure should not be discussed on party lines. The subject matter of the measure was too important to engage in party bickerings and he therefore invited free discussion and asked members to submit suggestions of a constructive nature.

Nor did the Prime Minister confine his invitation to members of Parliament alone but to men outside Parliament so that the best combination of intellect and vision could get together and devise a measure that would be stable, thorough and acceptable to all concerned.

What response did the Prime Minister receive to his earnest appeal—a suggestion to delay the Bill till after the election. One would, expect that at least members of Parliament would have some knowledge of the economic, moral and political background of a situation that sometimes arise in our midst and make a Bill such as we are dealing with necessary. I refer to abnormal war conditions where gambling in land and other property become rampant and 1 uncontrollable and to delay the Bill or fail to make legal protection is to betray the trust placed in the Government as the guardians of the people. To this extent I heartily approve the Government’s action in forcing the measure through Parliament.

Exception has been' tak ; en to the compulsory clauses in the Bill. It is characterised as confiscation and highway robbery. Any law or statute is an instrument of law devised to compel people to do something they don’tlike although the measure is unpalatable but found to be necessary in the in'erests of life and property. But if the provisions in question are objectionable and militate against the State and good; government then the court constituted under the provisions of the aforementioned Bill will, I feel sure, deal efficiently with matter in dispute.

I notice Mr .Sutherland is much concerned regarding the rights of property And mark you he says the Government should not, under the’ cloak of rehabilitation of the soldier undermine the rights of property holders. It is remarkable where Mr Sutherland gets his inspiration to use an unwarrantable innuendo to discredit the Labour Government for the honest effort made in the interests of the returned servicemen.

Mr (Sutherland again comes to light and says he stands firm on the basis of seeing returned men rehabilitated so that they would be as well off or preferably better off than before they went away. The values of land and home must be stabilised. He agrees with the principle of returned men acquiring homes and suitable land at fair values. Having said all this, Mr Sutherland is agreeing with and supporting what is the backbone of the Bill.

The whole of principle features he has quoted are embodied in a very excellent Bill but how Mr Sutherland came to oppose the measure is unaccountable. W. H. TAYLOR, . August 30, 1943. Paeroa.