“THE UNJUST STEWARD."

Shannon News, 18 July 1922, Page 4

“THE UNJUST STEWARD."

GOVERNMENT AND SOLDIER SETTLERS. REBATE OF RENT AND REVALUATION NECESSARY, SAYS SIR

ANDREW 7 , RUSSELL. In a recent address Sir Andrew

Russell dealt wtli several matters of importance to returned soldiers. LAND SETTLEMENT AFTER WARS. Sir Andrew Russell said lie wished to explain as delinitely as lie could what the policy ol the R.S.A. was in

regard to the land, lie said that alter must wars it was usual to go in for

a policy ol land settlement. He recalled seeing in the Waikato the land which had been given to-Maori War soldiers in the ’liilies and ’sixties—-lern-covered hills away at the hack oi Beyond, that the soldiers threw up in disgust or sold lor a lew drinks.

Alter the Great War the amount 01 money the Government was prepared to spend made it a national question, and the success or failure ol the men would have a lar-reaching effect on the country as a whole. These men had put little ol their own money into the venture, hut had, in most cases .accepted a great lat mortgage | : until such time as hy their own work; and knowledge, they could make the' ( land their own. That meant that they were the debtors ol' the people ol the Dominion until their farms were paid for. There were two underlying ideas regarding the settlement of soldiers- on land. One was that it made lor a certain amount ol .social stability with which land ownership was always bound up, and the other idea was .that something should -be done lor the men who had fought for their country. The people of New Zealand, through the Government, looked on the soldiers as their sons whom they wished to do a good turn. With that object in view they were prepared to place them .on land where they thought they might live happy and useful lives. The question now was, “What action would each of you take ih regard to a son of yours whom you had placed. on the land and who now found himself in the position of many of these soldiers ”

LAND NOT AN EL DORADO. No douht many of the soldiers, when they came hack, heard of the great profits that had been made and did not realise, that they were war protits, nor that a great deal of the profits went in extra taxation. They looked on . the land, lor the time being, as a kind of El Dorado. He had frequently put it to the returned men that if, when they came hack, the Government had refused to buy this land because its price was based on a war value, there would have been a howl throughout- the country. The returned men agreed with him in that, He therefore thought it was ; wrong to throw the blame on the Government for the high prices. Other ■ than by purchase, he only knew of one way in which the land could liave been acquired, and that was bv taking it compulsorily, which, under the circumstances then existing, would have been unjust and would have

created ifi-feeiing and bitterness. At the same time he could not help thinking that, it the same foresight and wisdom that had been shown in regard to land settlement as had been shown, in the repatriation of men to trades, there would not now be such urgent need of action. Boards had been set up of expert business men to see that no soldier went into any business in which he would not have a fair prospect of success. As a result of that policy not being applied to land settlement, he feared ~ many men were put on the land with altogether insufficient experience and training. These men started with a very big handicap in addition to the high price of their land. And before they had had time to learn how to farm in a skilful way the . fall in prices of produce came upon them. The profits of farming did not come out of, the land, but out of the farmer’s head—out of the use he made of the land, and he could not expect to make a profit until his head has assimilated the necessary knowledge.

ONE OF THE MISTAKES. Here was one of the mistakes the Government made. They should have, : at whatever cost, appointed paid supervisors to look after these inexperienced men. It should have been the supervisor’s job to .see that the men made a success of it. It could be concluded that the men who did not succeed under those conditions were no good as farmers and never would be any good, and the sooner they got off the land the better for everyone.

The. truth that had to he faced, continued Sir Andrew, was that, whatever it cost to make soldier settlement a success, the country would he wise to find. He again emphasised the inter-dependence of town and country, and said that if the man on the land failed, all would go down with him. There was no such thing as town and

country: their interests were far too intimately bound up together. The scheme of soldier settlement involved several thousands of' men and twenty millions of money. Most of the sol-dier-settlers still had good stout hearts and were doing their best to carry on, in spite of the fact- that they were drifting behind in ' the payment of their rents and the ordinary payments all of us incur. They were quite unable to find ready money to improve their farms, and it was well known that one could not get money out of a farm unless he put money in. One could out of a sheep farm in the olcl days, but not now. “We have suggested to the Government that- the whole question is too serious to be put off by expressions of pious goodwill, iit was no use saying to these men: ‘lt’s all right; you are good fellows, and as long as you are good we will not turn you off.’” What the men wanted was hope in the future, and he would advise them to walk off rather than remain on tlieir farms under conditions that he considered were akin to slavery.

There should be a definite policy in regard to the payment oi interest due to the Government. “We say it is necessary that all past rents should be written off in cases where the men have been unable to pay, so that I liey can start with a clean sheet.” Then a revaluation of the land lor the purposes of rental should be undertaken. Its value should be reduced by whatever percentage shrewd men considered necessary, and the soldier-settlers who could riot make their farms pay at the lower value, should get off the land and make room for those who would. A man must be both able and willing before he could succeed. R was only when they got the soldiersettlers fixed up on this* equitable basis that they could sift out the successes from the failures.

He repudiated the mawkish philosophy which said, “Never mind if you fail, we will look after you.” it required downright decisive treatment. When they came to revaluation lor capital purposes, they were on very much more delicate ground. Who could claim to be able to put such a value on land and say definitely: This is worth £ls per acm and that £65? The prices of our produce were not stabilised yet, but the R.S.A. urged that the revaluations should he based on the prices ol' produce for the past jg years. They did not claim that as the best basis, but they said to the Government: Find a better one, Sir Andrew' suggested that, with a view to helping the; soldiers, a local man ol experience, who had the confidence of the district, should be engaged ami given executive authority over them If they could pay their rent he would not worry them. If they could not they must follow his advice. Some farmers without experience would lose more in one year than such an officer would cost in five years. Ihe R.S.A. made a strong point of the soldier helping himself. He must realise that he had obligations that he must not shirk. He spoke of the need of improving dairy herds and quoted the success of co-operation : and closer settlement in Denmark. Concluding, Sir Andrew said that, like the Unjust Steward in the Bible, the Government should say to these men: Sit down quickly at the table and write off so much. Many soldiersettlers, at the present time, were living under deep depression, 'lliey were unable to see blue water ahead of them, and until they could do that no progress could be expected.