PROMOTING SETTLEMENT.

Putaruru Press, Volume VII, Issue 307, 26 September 1929, Page 6

PROMOTING SETTLEMENT.

SUGGESTIONS ENDORSED. Matamata Proposals, j On Government Scheme. “It seems to me that a weakness is that there are too many departmental officers appointed to administer the new land proposals,” stated Mr. H. Rollett, Peria, at a joint conference of farmers and businessmen, "when the new land settlement proposals were under discussion. These remarks found hearty agreement, and appeared to reflect the opinion of the meeting on the latest proposals to satisfy what another speaker described as the evident land hunger in the Dominion.

Speaking for the Matamata Chamber of Commerce, which body introduced the discussion, Mr. Griffiths stated that the chamber had been keenly interested in the various local endeavours which were being made to promote settlement in the Matamata district, such as at Turanga-o-znoana, Tapui and on Morgan’s block. "The chamber realised that the prosr perity of the country was bound up with the land from which about 97 per cent of the country’s income was derived.

Sketching the new land settlement proposals, the speaker stated a board was set up consisting of the Minister «f Lands, the Under-Secretary of Lands, the permanent head of Agriculture and the Treasury, the principal accounting officers of Lands and Survey, and the superintendent cf State Advances, with a quorum of three. An advisory committee consisting of thr Commissioner, .of Crown in whose district the land was situated and two others would be appointed at the pleasure of the Minister. The duty of this committee was to enquire into and report on such matters as were submitted to it. Members would be paid and also given allowances for meetings as the Minister thought fit. The Minister might on the recommendation of the board, survey, drain, reclaim, road, fence, grass, erect buildings, or do any other such work for promoting settlement. He was also empowered to buy tools, plant, machinery and erect camps and buildings for workmen. He might also buy and sell stock for depasturing on . land being developed. The cost of the above would be taken from the lands for settlement account for which ' the

Government would provide up to £5,000,000. The speaker stated that a weakness was that too many departmental officials were involved and too few practical men. It would be the same old story of red tape with the usual amount of waste and delay. The advisory committee should consist of at least two practical farmers and two business organisers, and their powers might be extended with advantage so that they could act as mediators in sales of land. The Government could not bargain with sellers, but such a committee could. Further, it was useless having farmer members who did not understand the country. Whether it was swamp, gum, or pumice land the farmer should be experienced in the class of country being ■ handled. The Government might also invite schemes from local bodies and ' branches of the Farmers’ Union, for none knew local conditions better. In regard to private sub-divisions, there was a difficulty in regard to roading in that local bodies rightly demanded the formation of roads to their standard before they agreed to the dedication of new roads. To do this it was not always possible to put up the necessary cash. The chamber was keenly interested in the question of land settlement, and the more the land was cut up the better it was for farmers, because they got a better business town at their doors.

Mr. Prowse agreed that local com--1 mittees must be drawn from the class of land which was being handled, as it was absurd to expect a man used to farming swamp country to advise on pumice lands. Mr. Taylor stated that some farmers might be glad to form a special rating area to assist in cutting up their land, but there were difficulties in doing this. It was to give a chance to genuine settlers to obtain improved land that they wanted to assist so far as they could in getting local sub-divisions through.

Mr. Gunn stated there was an evident land hunger, and anything they could do as to ease this should be done, He felt the suggestion of a go-between or mediator was a good ore. Production would go up, railway traffic increase and all round prosperity be assisted. He was surprised to hear of the anomalies and thought they should he remedied if possible. Mr. Rollett stated the ground had been well covered. He instanced a road which would have given 40 new farms for the Matamata county, but there was no provision for r&ising money to metal the read. Until dedicated they could not go ahead. At Peria their properties would benefit

for cutting up by a road running along by their back boundary, with a cress road to Matamata. It would be a big benefit to the farmers, the town and the country. The same thing applied to Morgan’s and to the Tapui block. Such lands were good and could be made into decent farms, but some were now a menace owing to ragwort. It was a question of organisation and pounds, shillings and pence. Above all land settlement schemes should assist the man with a family who was willing to go back and work. (Hear, hear). There were too many departmental officers in the new proposal. It would be the same old scheme of sending a letter down and getting a reply that it was being considered. (Laughter). It would be far better to have practical farmers and businessmen on the advisory committees. (Applause).

Mr. Melrose supported the proposals and stated that they had , already been approved on general lines by the farmers’ provincial conference, more especially the idea of local committees. It had been pointed out that it would be folly to bring a man from the south to assist with pumice land.

Mr. Given stated that he was quite in accord with the remarks made on the land. It was a vital question, and all should endeavour to get as many on the land as possible. With suitable facilities arid finance he felt there would be no lack of applicants for land. (Hear, hear). It should be easy to overcome the difficulty in regard to roading private lands, as it was only fair that county councils should be safeguarded. He would like to see the chamber and the unions enter a strong protest with a view to getting defects remedied. The prosperity of the country wholly rested on getting more men on the land.

Mr. Gillingham, secretary of the Walton branch, also briefly supported the endeavour to promote land settlement.

Mr. Prowse (chairman) thanked the speakers for their interesting remarks, and suggested that it might be a bit hasty to press any resolution that night. His opinion was that it would be better to leave the matter till next joint meeting, when they would have consiutered the question more.

A member pointed out that the next meeting might possibly be too late, as the Act was now being considered. If there were common grounds of agreement these could be supported and minor details left. Mr. G. G. Bell mentioned that it was quite possible for a council to dedicate a road without the money, provided they were satisfied the money would be forthcoming. It was purely a question of assisting with the finance.

It was then unanimously agreed, on the motion of Messrs. Rollett and Taylor, to forward the following motion to the Prime Minister, the Minister of lands and Mr. C. H. Clinkard, M.P.: “ That this joint meeting of members of the Matamata branch of the New Zealand Farmers’ Union and Matamata Chamber of Commerce is of the opinion that advisory committees for the proposed new land settlement scheme should consist of five members composed of practical farmers and businessmen thoroughly familiar with the district being developed, who should also be in a position to act as mediators in purchasing of land, and for organising the vigorous settlement of land, and whose meetings should be open to the press. Also that the difficulty in regard to dedication of roads through private sub-division should be adjusted.”