IS GALATEA TYPICAL?

Rotorua Morning Post, Volume 2, Issue 222, 13 May 1932, Page 4

IS GALATEA TYPICAL?

Practically all work on the development of the Galatea Estate, purchased early last year for closer settlement at a cost of over £78,000 has been suspended for an indefinite period and for an unknown reason. All that can be learned definitely was set out in a special article published in the columns of the "Morning- Post" yesterday. This is yet another instance of the pernicious "hush, hush" policy pursued in recent years. The net results are a further loss of confidence in the Government's ahility to carry a job to an intelligent completion and the creation of a crop of extravagant rumours, many of them as damaging to the district and to the capable officers who are the victims of the Government's stupidities and vacillation, as they are probably unfounded. The figures .marshalled in the article constitute a damning indictment of the present Government's lack of policy in regard to land settlement. A very large sum, under present circumstances, has been spent upon Galatea. Such work as has been done, it can be stated definitely, has been well done, though there are reasons to believe that the proposed subdivision of the estate into individual selections was unwisely conceived. If this is so, it may be necessary to re-design some of it, in which case the Government should be frank about the matter, admit any errors that may have been made, and, having committed itself so far and spent so much money, push ahead until the whole undertaking is brought to the productive stage. The Government's action in stopping work and its silence in the face of the rumours in circulation'is incomprehensible. The available figures show that to date, in addition to the purchase price, the sum of £57,000 has been spent upon developmental work on the estate and it is known that a great deal of this work is nearing completion. Its suspension, therefore, before it can be made productive, and at a time when every penny of the public's money mu&t be made to work, and work hard, in the interfests of economic recovery, will take a lot of explaining. This is particularly the case at present, when the Government is earnestly engaged in impressing upon the country the vital importance of ihcreasing primary production for export and its Minister of Employment is strenuously endeavouring to win support for his small farm plan as a means of relieving the unemployment situation. Among the many promises made to the country by the Coalition Was a re-vitalised and really progressive land settlement policy, and for a time it looked as though the Government really meant what. it said. In this district particularly, where there are tens of thousands of acres which, with the knowledge noW available, are capable of being brought into production "at reasonable cost and comparatively rapidly, there was much activity. Mr. Coates, who had announced on joining the Government that land settlerhent was to be the real foundation of his policy of national rehabilitation, appeared to be about to ''get things done." Is Galatea to be taken as a typical example of the boasted policy ; and if not, why. Ufiless the Government answers the question fully and frankly, it can hardly expect the response it seeks from the community to its small farm plan, which as we have previously pointed out, depends very largely for its success upon active public support and co-operation. If Galatea, a property eminently suitable for closer settlement, is to be left to lie idle for an indefinite period while the work already done upon it either deteriorates or absorbs more money in maintenance chaTgeS, without any explanation of the reasons for this sudden reversal of policy at a time when the Government is seeking land for settlers, it will be hardly surprising if a sceptical public fai'ls to respond to Mr. Coates's appeals.