THE LAND BILL.

Taranaki Daily News, Volume L, Issue 60, 4 October 1907, Page 2

THE LAND BILL.

THE DEBATE COMMENCES. X'er Press Association. I Wellington, Last Night. I The House resuming at 7.30, the Hon,'' Mr McNab moved the second reading ot tiio Land Laws Amendment incisure introduced last session. He congratulated members on the passing of the Assessment Act, which, he said, went much further than the provisions contained in his Bill of last year. He desired.to draw members' attention to the clai.si doing away with the lease-in-perpetuity system. During the time that system had been .in existence, there had been taken out 7528 leases, with an area ot 1,005,850 acres, and a capital value ol

£1,400,485. He added that the total L.I.P. lenses were 11,208, with 2,283,70» acres, and a total capital value of £5,528,547. One of the points going jto arise in the future is the interest ot tenants under tho 009 years' lease, which is increasing year by year. He said that in future people Mould come to look upon them merely ns tenants, and they, in turn, would seek to turn their lease- I holds into freeholds, and consequently the time would be when there would be no leaseholders. On that account lie asked tho House to do away with leaseholds which were only so in name, and constitute in their place a term of GO years' renewable lease. He knew some members considered that was too long, a term, but there were various classes of lands in which a fair return

could not be obtained in a few years. He believed a problem would occur in the future when 42 years' leases were expiring, and he would ask the House if they could not give these people a better system of leases—perpetual right of renewal. The terms of the Bill, Tie contended, were absolutely fair. The Crown appointed an arbitrator, and the tenant did likewise, and these two in turn appointed a. third. The improvements were defined under the Act of 'IBO2, and were the rights of the tenant, but under this Bill tho Government, went further in lite direction of granttin" the tenants' right to improvements. Tho record of the class of land in its original state would be available to the Crown and to tenants at all times, and would go a long "way to arriving at a fair assessment. He particularly desired to call members' attention to clause 15, which applied to mm-

erals on leases. Clause 10 allowed alt tenants to p.iy in sums of £lO up to 00 per cent of* the capital value, so that when repayments had been made up to !f0 per cent of the capital value, the rent was reduced one-half. Proceeding, he said that where under certain conditions a farmer could carry on his farm under whatever conditions or system ho liked. Under the Lands for Settlement Act, many applications were made for genuine settlement, and the percentage of refusal after enquiry by the Land Board was small. Under this Bill, preference was to be given to landless applicants, and the definition of landless was embodied under section 40 to other classes of applicants, whilst section 50 gave preference, after landless and other applicants had been de- I cided, to former unsuccessful applicants. He added that it was proposed to allow holders of Lease-in-Perpetuity to convert to Renewable Lease, and so, obtain tin? benefit-of cheaper rent. He also intended in committee to bring down a clause to allow holders of leases in mining -uTstricts to convert to Eoncwable Leases. Proceeding, he said provisions were made in the Bill to admit of a leaseholder acquiring the freehold by arbitration, as against the provisions under last year's Bill that ho could obtain it at auction. He contended that after granting these conditions, it was advisable to prevent the selling of.properties that would lead to aggregation of estates, and he thought that he would be in a position to submit clauses which would have the effect of keeping these frehold properties separate and distinct for all time. He would also ask for these clauses to be put into operation for all transfers of land from the Crown, after this measure wafl put on the Statute Book. Clause 24 provided for the repealing of declarations under the schedules of the principal Act, and under clause 27 provision was made to prevent the transfer of leases until the lessee had resided continuously on his lease for two years. Section 29 provided for the division of lands into three classes, so as to admit of extended areas of third-class lands being held. Clause 31 provided that all application for unsurveyed land should he advertised. Section 38 provided that only one run could be.held, except on the recommendation of the Board with the approval of the Minister, and clause 39 provided that a holder of a pasturage lease or' license may cultivate a portion of his run under the Lands. ! for Settlement section. The term of lease was to be 33 years, with perpetual right of renewal. Referring to dummying, he said it was an interesting study to note how Vh had developed during the last few years, and he contended that the ballot system was a factor in this practice. He did not infer that the great bulk of applications came from dummies, but he contended that there was a fair percentage of dummy applications made. Mr. Massey said Mr. McNab had put one side of the question, and it was for him (Mr. Massey), to put the other side. He denied that the main proposals of last year's Bill were contained in the Laud and Income Assessment Bill passed the previous night, as asserted by Mr. McNab. He contended that Mr. McNab had climb-id down from his' attitude of the Bill of lust year by his admission of the right of the leaseholder to acquire the freehold. He considered that a valuator coming along at the expiry of leases would mean confiscation for improvements and the inc.- using of rent, as everything' depended on the valuator's recommendation in the assossing of rent for a new lease. He added that existing conditions would be more • acceptable to the tenant. He scathingly attacked the clause relating to tainerals, and contended that it would be far better for the country to grant the freehold, so that a settler would do all possible in the way of placing improvements on and developing his land. ' He did not think any settler under the 999 years lease would convert to either a (i 6 or 33 years renewable lease. He maintained that the 999 years lease, with all its disadvantages, was far preferable to a 66 or 33 years lease. The thin end of the wedge of the freehold had been inserted, and, he added, It was for the Opposition to drive the wedge home as firmly as possible, so that every settler or resident in the rural districts should be able to possess the freehold of his land. He contended that they should be allowed to acquire the freehold at the original value, and added that this country was paying more for its borrowed capital than it was obtaining from its settlers, consequently they were losing on the 999 years leases. He asserted that the reversion interest on these leaseholds was practically worth less, as not a member in the House would give one sovereign for any 999 yearß lease. Proceeding, he maintained that the provisions of the Bill in regard to. . leaseholders acquiring the freehold were impossible, and added that the prospects of closer settlement would be much improved 1 by giving the leaseholder an easier mode of acquiring the freehold.

This country should encourage a class of small farmers, «ach cultivating his own property, and lie contended this desired encouragement was not being given under the Bill. Under the Act of 1 000, provision was made in acquiring land convpulsorily to grant compensation for loss of business, hut not so under this Bill, • clearly showing that it was not intended to encourage or recompense a man for his enterprise and energy. Referring to revaluation at tlte expiration of a leasehold, ho contended that a settler would neglect his fences and farm generally so that lie could get hi* lease renewed at as cheap a rent as possible. Tf, on the other hand, he desired to leave his lease, then he would keep everything spick and span, so that lie could get the highest possible value for his improvements. Ho added that Mr. McXab might be Minister for Lands, but he was certainly not Minister for ! Settlement, lie contended that hardly a, session came round but what some attempt was made to weaken the position of the man on the land. Last year the Minister was wanting to go too far, and had found it necessary to back down. Referring to the tender system, he said he did not like it, and urged that they should go back to the ballot system, but should 'draft a clause to protect it from the machinations of speculators and gamblers. He added that if we prevented these gamblers we would have ' done more in the interests of settle- i ment than, had been done for the past ' dizen years. i The Premier explained that the Bill 1 Had been divided ns from Inst year so < that members wuW lw given an onnoiS U

tunity of voting on the separate items, '' nud the advantages of this course had - •■ been shown the previous night, when the House practically unanimously sup-' » i ported the third reading of the Assetsinent Bill. Referring to the freehold, lie said under the measure 1,005,850 | acres of Crown lands were available for ' converting to this tenure, and the whoh» - : of the Crown lands held under the optional system were also open to freehold tenure, whilst certain reservations were made under another Bill for leasehold I tenure. One of the reasons that land for settlement leases was not placed in the same position as lease in perpetuity was that for years to come the Government would have to continue to purv , chase estates under this system, and it I was necessary to provide legislation to

guard against these lands being againaggregated, with its consequent evils. He added they were not continuing the optional system, but with the assistance of hon. members it was hoped to do n great deal in the direction of 'settling the land difficulties of this colony. He a'dded that the purchase of estates was • carried out in the interests of the coun- ! try, and. he refuted Mr. Massey's statement that the money so borrowed was a loss WTihe State, as since .1897 a profit had been realised to the State of £270,1881 Proceeding, he said they could not assess the value to this country of the placing of settlers on the land, as this developed the land and increased the wealth and prosperity of the country. Referring to Mr. Massey's I statement that every purchase of freejhold was an opponent to socialism, he said that when this country went in for State railways it adopted State social-

ism, and under this Bill it was proposed by State socialism to grant to leaseholders the right to acquire the freehold. Mr. Massey: That is individualism. (The Premier, continuing: "It is also -' State socialism." He contended that a • man placed on the land ten years ago without any capital was now clamoring for the freehold, and added that there were many men without land and capital at tho present time who were desirous of getting on the land, and they should be given the same opportunity of making homes for themselves as were. given to their predecessors ten yean ago. Mr. Mills said that before the Opposition started to agitate for the freehold very few of the holders of loase-in-perpetuity desired to acquire the freehold. He added that he believed in the

optional system. Mr. W. Fraser contended_ that the optional system as contained in the Bill was of a very reserved and farcical nature. He added that he did not like the revaluation proposal, neither did men in the country like it. ■Mr. Malcolm said that, whilst a freeholder, he was opposed to the Bill, because it still contained the dementi of land nationalisation. _ Mr. Rcid urged that hetter provision should be made to encounfge settlers to search for minerals on their lands. Mr. Flatman considered the 08 years lease too long. (Left sitting.)