SHOULD STATE BUILD OR SELL?

Sun (Auckland), Volume I, Issue 127, 19 August 1927, Page 1

SHOULD STATE BUILD OR SELL?

HOUSES ON ITS HANDS BRIGHTER ADVANCES POSITION (THE SUN'S Parliamentary Reporter. WELLINGTON. Thursday. It was with some diffidence that the Minister of Finance, the Hon. W. Downie Stewart, told the House of Representatives to-night that the state of the State Advances Department was not nearly so bad as it had been two years ago. Mr. Stewart said that his diffidence was born of the realisation thatf as soon as he placed a bright face upon the department there would bo a renewal of the flood of applications for consideration for many hundreds of loans still awaiting the pleasure of the State Advances Board. Mr. Stewart mentioned the fact that in over 30 towns in New Zealand houses had fallen back on the department. So anxious were some people to have the loans attended to that four and five members of Parliament had been to the board in one day in support of one application. The position was not so bad as two years ago. Mr. J. McCombs: Some applicants are still 16 months behind. Mr. Stewart: Some are over 12, but so far as workers’ houses are concerned we are dealing with applications of June last year, and so far as farmers’ advances are concerned we are handling those of August last year. DECREASED WAITING LIST "In 1924 we had over 7,000 waiting, totalling £9,500,000.” continued Mr. Stewart. "At the present time we have 4,500 applications totalling £4,900,000. How long it will be before these will be dealt with will depend upon how much funds we get into the department. It has been suggested that no money is going in at all, but I will point out that while housing might be difficult in Wellington, in nearly every centre there are houses that the department is anxious to dispose of, and which it is willing to negotiate with. With this state of affairs it is a questionable policy to go building without restriction. Mr. F. N. Bar tram; What is the reason for their becoming vacant? Mr. Stewart: Some people cannot maintain their payments, and there might be other reasons. Mr. Bartram: Is the second mortgage the trouble? Mr. Stewart: It might be. In some cases we did what we could to put therp securely in their house©. NEED FOR CAUTION Mr. Stewart read the names of all towns with the overhousing. In reply to an interjection by Mr. E. J. Howard, Mr. Stewart said that the old Housing Department might have made mistakes, but where there were too many houses the price would have to be made attractive. The Government’s policy must be careful with houses falling back on to its hands. Mr. P. Fraser: Are they all defaulting payments? Mr. Stewart: I am not sure of all the reasons. Mr. Stewart said that he had read a message from Auckland stating that those who had been receiving £2 5s for a house there were glad to get £ 1 ss. Mr. Bartram: Rubbish. Mr. Stewart said that if houses were going back to the department in 30 towns of the Dominion, it raised the question whether it would not be better for the department to sell to applicants for loans some of the houses already built, providing they were certified in good condition, rather than build new ones that were not needed. During four months since April £500,000 had been granted to 273 applicants for workers’ houses, an average of 100 a month. This was a rapid expenditure for one department. The total number of houses ejected or assisted in town and country was 582, involving £642,000, so that, for the purposes of State advances, during the four months mentioned, nearly £1,000,000 had been advanced. Mr. Bartram: Is that on the 95 per cent, basis? Mr. Stewart: In certain cases the department does not always lend on this basis. It is a question as to whether the State is to be the only housebulider in the country.