LABOUR’S CHIEF PLANKS EXPLAINED.

Taihape Daily Times, Volume XI, Issue 3359, 11 December 1919, Page 5

LABOUR’S CHIEF PLANKS EXPLAINED.

L (To.the Editor.) i Si,-,._'_Thé ‘above is the title of a] /'-publication, issued by the Officiall mbour Party and bea°.'ring the name of ‘ («The Worker” as publisher. l The ]a,st paragraph in the public‘ ation reads as follows: “Don’s split! straws about personalities! Vote forthe Oflicial Labour Candidates, who are pledged to carry out these principles.” ‘ Most of the readers -of your valuable paper are resident in either the! Rangitikei or ‘Waimarino .electoratcs.l It is, therefore, of the most vital importance that, as there is an official! Labour candicate pledged to carry out “these principles’? standing for each of those electorates, the electors should havena thorough understanding" as to how “these principles” are going to; afiect them if put in-to operation. * To deal with the whole of the planks of the platform set -out "in the publication referred to would occupy a great many of your valuable columns, but there is one subject, viz., land, which I think demands the closest scrutiny of the electors before polling day, lest there ‘maybe any who have not yet realised what the effect would be to 2 them the Oflicial Labour 'Pa.rty’s land ‘policy were to be applied to this country. ‘ Under the heading, “Land," appears" the following clauses, among others: . - 2. (b) The‘ -securing to the community of all values made (by the community. . 3 (a) A State valuation of ’all pri-vately-owned land. such valuation to remain on record as the measure of the private land-holders’ interest .‘.in the land. * | - 3 (b) Land shall not be sold or transferred except to or from the State. ' A 3 (c) The owner shall have. the right to surrender his land on the vain. ation set out in sub-clause (3).. _ This, at firs-t glahce, may ~aLppear innocent enough, but,. lotus lo‘o-k_;at~:~it‘~ ‘at close range, and,'foreltherpurpose of. illustration, we will imagine ‘that "on December Ist, 1919, John’-Brown,“ airailway employee in Taihape, buys with his hard-earned savings at little property of“ 50‘ acres, for which he pays, 01' undertake to pay £IOOO, the unimproved value being estimated by him to be worth £6OO and it-he improvements £4.00,‘ , ~ - Let us also imagine that on December 17th, 1919, the Official Labour Party secures the reins of Government. They immediately set about making a valuation "of all privately-' owned land._ The valuer appointed by the Labour Government is of opinion that Brown paid too much "for the property, and hc‘ass_esses the unimproved value at only £4OO, which sum, in - accordance with clause A 3 (a) “shall re. main on re'co_rd as the measure of the land-holder”s interest inijthe‘ lazid"’—plus, of course, the value of improve-’

rnenvts. With the ‘assistance of his family, Brown is able to work his little farm and still retain his position‘ in the {railway service. tfilvlerylthing glues swimmingly for ‘three years, during which period he spends another £2OO on improvements, making the total cost to him £I2OO in all. During his occupancy, by hard Work and intelligent farming he increases the ‘producing value of the property quite 50 per cent, and, therefore, should have, proportionally have increased it.s market value. At the end of the three years he receives orders to transfer to another town, which necessitates him selling out. Under clause 3 (b) he finds that he has but one client to . whom he may sell, viz., the State; to whom he duly ofiers the property. (The Labour Government turns up the valuation as provided Auirddr clause 3 (9.). and «tells him that his interest in the property is £4OO, as originally recorded by the Labour Government’s Valuer. In addition to this, he is also entitled to the value of his improvements. The Labour 3GroVernnlent’s Valuer is‘ sent to value the improvements, and says -they are worth £SOO making the {total (capital Vlalußq‘ti’o.n -t£9oo, andpthis is the sum for whick, ‘under clause 3 (c) Brown “shall have the right (save the mark!) to surrender his land.” ' £9OO for what cost him in hard cash £1200!" John Brown asks: “What then becomes of my other £300? and ‘HI9 answer is bea.u~tifully "simple-it belongs to the community. (See clause .2 (13).) ' . Now, that which can happen to John Brown with 50 aares, man happen to his work-mate with his quarter acre; Land is land, no matter what the? .3193. I WOUId like ‘e.v('3l-y" worker evening his own home 10‘ Comp“? ,t},e -_'lp;lcgr'he paid for it with the Gov. eminent valuation -of it, and ask himselflif he is prepared to deliberately .-to hand the diflcrenee to the commum ity, as he undoubtedly will do if he assists into power a party who gave. Gate» the land policy declared in the j Oflicial hL';lbour platform. ' V" ‘ ‘A ,I believe .there are men and‘ women ‘lirvholhavelvoted consistently with ‘the Party in every previous cam_"._l

paign, who are to-clay inclined to “give the Labour Party a -trial,” but I believe, also, they have never had the ‘aspect of the present Oficial Labour party’s policy prsented to them, which__«,«l have here endeavoured to deal with. This is my—l'easo_n for trespassing atfs_ueh length ‘on your valuable space, and I shall be content if I have warned in time any old Liberal supporters who may have been inclined to “give the ‘Labour Party a trial.” .

The Liberal Leader has declared his intention of giving sane Labour representation in his Cabinet, if his party is elected to power, and has -mentioned Mr Vc~itch’s name in ‘that connection. I believe this to be a move in the right direction, and much more worthy of support than the party Whose land proposals, if carried into eifr-ct, would injure practically every propertyowner in «the Dominion.——l am, e-tc., TEN ACRES.