WORKERS' HOMES.

Taranaki Daily News, Volume XLVII, Issue 81856, 3 October 1906, Page 2

WORKERS' HOMES.

A PROPOSED AMENDMENT. THE PETONE "FAILURE." DISCUSSION IN THE HOUSE. (By Telegraph.—Press Association.) Wellington, October 2 In moving the second reading of the Workers' Dwellings Act Amendment in the House yesterday afternoon the Minister for Labour explained the reason for raising the limit of qualification from ,£l5O to ,£2OO a year to bo to increase the demand for the 77 houses now in the possession of the Department. As a matter of fact, there were in hand a large number of applications from workers drawing between and .Woo, and very few from those drawing less.

Mr Massey objected to the Bill, as it was contrary to the spirit of the arrangement proposed last year, which was to benefit the smaller workers. He would not oppose the Bill, but he thought it wouid be better to leave the men of four pounds and upwards a week to rely on the Workers' Advances Bill just now added to the Order Paper. Mr McLachlan agreed with the Leader of the Opposition. He did not liko to see the Government recede so soon from the position taken up last year. He criticised the homes built at Petone as the most grotesque collection of houses he had ever seen, with small rooms, small windows, and too many conveniences. Mr Arnold endorsed what had fallen from the Member for Ashburton about the character of the houses. He had known many Petone workers who had made up their minds to take up these homes, who had changed their minds as soon as they had seen them. Ho blamed the Department for buying unsuitable land and rejecting suitable. The objects of the work-' ers' dwelling policy was the assistance of the poorer labourers in the congested districts. Mr Fisher would oppose the Bill as subversive of the whole policy of aiding the poorest workers in congested districts. He thought the remedy for the evil which had been done would be tho setting up a new special Board acquainted with the wants of the class requiring relief. The Land Purchase Board knew as much about these requirements as he knew about astronomy. That Board had been "swindled" at Petone, and the Bill was an attempt on the part of the Government to make the best of a bad bargain, but the right thing would be to exhaust the chances of the lower paid men before "taking up the /J2OO a year men.

> Mr Bollard thought a man with £n a week didn't require any help to : get himself a house, but he would i vote for the Bill. Mr Barber regretted the need for ! the Bill. He would support it only i if confined to the land at Petone. Mr Wi'ford criticised the style, de- : nounced the disregard of the local by- ■ laws shown in the buildings, and declared that the deposit was too high, giving that as the main reason for the Petone failure. He suggested \ that in future one day's wage would be the maximum of deposit in a'l these cases, Mr Ell, while defending the Bill, traversed the whole case which had been made out against the Petone buildingß. He said they were in a very suitab'c and pleasant, locality, that they were built in various styles as ordered by the House, and provided with larger and better ventilated rooms than scores upon scores of working homes. He thought the largo number of up-to-date conveniences very much to be commended, not captiously criticised. He denied that the windows were small, and these advantages were offered at a rent below anything within reach of the working men anywhere else. ■ The only fault was, in his opinion, that there were not rooms enough for large families. The reason for the failure of these houses was chiefly the unreasonable and wi'd criticism to which they had been subjected. Mr Baunie supported the Bill, though it should, he thought, be confined to Petone, and suggested that in future the men should supply their own designs. Mr llanah defended the designs and the architects. Mr Tanner regretted what had hap- v pened, and did not like the extension " ■ of ihc rrirnetfy to the whole system.' Mr Poole did not like the departure) from the original arrangement', Mr Reid thought municipal authorities ought to have power to borrow, under the Act.

Mr Barclay said there was no hurry to accept Petone as a proof of failure. Ai that place the workers were dependent on long-standing industries, and had made their own arrangenvnets, which couM not Ijo disturbed. The old system woyld be found very bucccssfyl in other places. He thought, moreover, the Pctono designs somewhat too elaborate and expensive. There ought to be solid comfort, not semi-gentility. He would not a'low his faith in the system to be damped because a few cottages were not just what he thought they ought to be. Rent was, after all, the main thing, and 10/ and 12/, as at Petone, were better than 17/ and 18/, but the rents ought to be oven lower. Ho would like Ihe Bill to bo confined to these

particular cottages. Mr Hogg had "damned the measure with faint praise" last year, and he would damn it with fainter now. Vet ho would support the Premier's attempt 10 get over a hard legacy. Ho agreed with Mr Hanan that tho best plan would be to acquire sites for tho workingmen and let them build their own houses. The Hon. Mr Millar, in reply, pointed out that the principal Act was just what the workers have asked for. Tho late Minister of Labour was very keen on the subject. Hi's ideal was that every man should have Ins own house on his own ground. To realise this ideal had proved to be a little more expensive than was at first anticipated. As to the suggestions for the purchase of land in'towns, he defied lion, .members to show him any land at a fair prise. He.read 'from the Evening Post an advertisement offering land at jfiio per foot. I n ; f u . lure they would never have such land *• as that. • The Department wou'd take great care to ha'vo the houses let •/ as thev were built. They would alsQ ' have less ornamentation than at Pe. tone, hut if hon. members wanted arger rooms, they must increase the limit of cost prescribed by the Act. As to building their own houses, his colleague's Bill, noticed that day. would enable workers to do that, and therefore would be a valuab'o adjunct !to this measure. He recognised the value of the suggestion to set up a special board, and thought such a thing might be set up as a board of advice to the present Land Purchase Board. In the ma!tc r of applications, nothing is asked for deposit, and on taking over a house all a man was to pay down is one pound. The Bill was rca( ) a soconc | t ; mo on (he voices, and the House rose at 5.30,