PARLIAMENT.

Stratford Evening Post, Volume XXXIV, Issue 55, 29 October 1912, Page 8

PARLIAMENT.

MONDAY, OCTOBER 28. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES. ( Per Press Association A Wellington, October 23. The House met at 7.30 p.m. SHOPS AND OFFICES. The Shops and Offices Bill was rent a second time pro forma, and refenxv to the Labour Bills Committee. THE LAND BILL. Mr Massey then moved the third reading of the Land Bill. Mr Isitt said that he was happy in the belief that the Bill would he the undoing of the men responsible for it. and it would stand on the Statute Book to their shame, a monument to their innate Toryism and of their unworthy determination to purchase votes by any and every means. Mr Russell said that the policy of the Government in connection w.tl: land legislation had been one of tinkering and did not conduce to the increased settlement of the land as a whdle, except to a very limited extent. The granting of the freeliok to holders of 33 years’ renewable leases was an act of spoliation, which ho believed would go down as a blot upon the legislation of the Massey Government. A motion by Mr Sidey to recommit the Bill for the purpose of providing that the limitation of area provision in part 13 of the Land Act, 1908, shah apply to all lands disposed of, war. no; discussed, and was lost by 35 to 20. Mr Laurenson wanted to know wliai was the good of talking about settling lands when two-thirds of the lands in Hawke’s Bay were owned by a feu people. Some people thought that all that mattered were sheep, cows, and horses. He objected to the Bill, be cause it was reactionary and put the country back twenty years. Mr Wilkinson urged that more encouragement should be given to the young men of New Zealand to go on bush lands. Mr McCallum hoped that the Council would deal with tire Bill on it: merits. He had no confidence in the measure generally. Mr Hanan said that the Bill wonlr put to the test the professions of the Government on the land question, and he opined as time went on that the;, would have to undo the wrong committed under it. In the House after midnight the dis mission on the Land Bill was continued by Messrs Hindmarsh, Atmore, and Young. The debate was continued by Messrs Robertson, Witty, and Buchanan, and the House was left sitting at 2 a.m. In the House after 2 a.m., the debate on the third reading of the Land Bill was continued.

Mr Massey, in reply to criticism, said lie did not make a fetish of the limitation in the Bill which was decided by other factors. The system of free, trade in land tended towards the breaking up of large estates, and he instanced Waikato and Canterbury as cases in point. The process was a young one all over New Zealand. He believed that in ten yeans’ time there would not he a large estate left in New Zealand. It was absurd to talk about parting with the national heritage. Whatever was done with the laws by way of sale it must be remembered that the land was always there to be taxed. Pic contended, however, that the limitation of area clauses in the Bill were sufficient. The Bill would increase settlement and subdivision. He estimated that £500,000 would be available after the first year from conversion of lessees. A great deal of misrepresentation had gone on in connect’on with the provision of the Bill. He challenged the Opposition to show one clause which would benefit largo landowners. “We have a great more to do in the Bill of the new year,” he added, and lie went on to say that lie intended, during the recess, to inquire into the reason why large blocks of land are not carrying so many sheep as formerly, and he expected to he able to meet tiie House with satisfactory proposals next session. The Bill was read a 1 third time on division, the voting he- , ing 42 to 13, and the House rose at I 3.5 a.rn.