THE LAND BILL.

Te Aroha News, Volume XXVI, Issue 43095, 21 May 1907, Page 4

THE LAND BILL.

A good deal of misunderstanding appears to exist as to the effect of the various proposals contained in thie Land Bill and some of the contentions put forward 'by the opponents o f the Bill have been decidedly misleading. The World is partly ruled by sentiment, and it is a comparatively easy operation for an opponent of thie measure to dilate on the advantages of the freehold, the homestead, and Lhe dangers of confiscation. But is it in the interests' of this colony that the Government who are really the Trustees of the people, should part with this valuable heritage? What has been the ''effect of the large purchases that were allowed to be made under the Conservative regime? The Government of to>~day. is compelled to expend large stuns of money for the repurchase of this lands at greatly enhanced figures so a® to meet the ever-growing demand for, land. The amount of money expended! in land purchases must be considerable, and if at the same time that the Government are paying, thousands and thousands of pounds for the resumption' of large estates, they are selling large areas of unimproved land, they are merely parting with what they Will be idompelled to pur- ’ chase later 'on. at a highly increased figure; And this higher price is usually ..due. more to the fact that settlement is daily increasing, other lands are being nrought under cultivation-, roads are being formed and railways constructed than to the individual enterprise- of the owner. If the State is compelled at the present time to purchase land, would it not be adopting a short-sighted policy if at- the same time it acted as seller—selling at a low and buying back at ai high figure? As.to the Opposition statement that t-h-ei Land Bill was a direct attack oni the existing freeholds, that ■no freehold was safe and that there Was the danger of Confiscation, there is no foundation for the assertion. The Bill provides for nothing in regard to existing titles, but only for tenures of the future in respect of Crown lands yet undisposed of. (Ministers have stated over and over, again that no Contract could be violated, and no Government could attempt to- do so, except in cases of resumption under the Lands for Settlement Act. The only existing tenure at all affected by the Bill was the occupation with right of purchase, and in that Case the State merely gave tenants the choice of another tenure lease, with the opportunity to pay off 90 per cent of the value. AJs -to the limitation of areas who* will deny that this is necessary to prevent a repetition of the past, to put an effectual barrier before land grabbing/ the pernicious process known, as gridironing. and the creation of land monopolies to fatten, on the struggling settlers? As to the endowment proposals in what easier method sould the huge grants for educational purposes, charitable aid, and old age pensions, be secured to the colony? As the Hon. J. A. Millar emphasised when speaking on the land proposals whEe at Thames, it was a measure framed in the interests of the people, as it prevented a valuable heritage being disposed of. it prevented the aggregation ' of large estates, it rendered available Crown lands for educational and other endowments, a-nd it did aws.v with the 09,9 years’ lease. It makes no attack on the 77 millions of freehold already held in New Zealand, while it w’ll provide endowments for the education of the children of New Zealand, wbii :h at the present time costs £-750,000 amp ally; for the old age pensions, which now amount to £250.000, and will increase as -additional recipients become a. charge on the fund, while it also makes further provision for charitable aid. These three items mean a charge on the colonv of considerably over £l.000.000, and' the Government, we contend, are acting! in the interests of the people of New Zealand and those who aTe to follow, when thaw decline to part further, with whlat is the people’s and the colony’s birthright.