THE Wairarapa Age MORNING DAILY SATURDAY, SEPTEMBER 28, 1912. THE LAND BILL.

Wairarapa Age, Volume XXXII, Issue 10719, 28 September 1912, Page 4

THE Wairarapa Age MORNING DAILY SATURDAY, SEPTEMBER 28, 1912. THE LAND BILL.

A 1 thought the Land Bill, as introduced by the Hon W. F. Massey an the House of Representatives on Thursday night, does not embrace all those reforms thut have been promised, and that one could have desired, it contains sufficient material to engage the serious attention of Parliament for the next week or two, and shows an honest desire on the part of tho Government to promote the speedy and more effective settlement of the land. The scheme which has been propounded for inducing the subdivision of large estates without the necessity for going upon the London market has a. great deal to recommend it, though time alone can tell whether it will i produce the results expected. Under I Part 11. of the Bill, the Minister may i enter into a voluntary agreement with I an owner for the subdivision ~of. bis estate. The Minister must approve of the reserve price placed upon the land, and of the plan of subdivision. . The sections must then be offered for sale, or lease with a purchasing clause, by public tender, and the owner is compelled to accept a tender, provided it reaches the reserve price. So that the owner will not l>e put to the expense of roading and surveying, the Government will undertake this work, allowing a reasonable time in which I to refund the money so expended. It seems to us that this is a weak snot in the Bill. It anticipates the expenditure of public money in roading and surveying private estates without any reasonable security that the work of subdivision will be immediately proceeded with. Probably, however, when the measure is in committee, some modification of this provision will he made. We are disappointed to find that there is no provision for assisting the poor man, or the man with limited means, to acquire the land when it is thrown open for selection by tender; nor is there a sufficient safeguard against the speculator. The next most important provision in the Bill is that which, nermits tho con-

version of tho leases held undor the Land for Settlements Act into freeholds. Wo cannot quito understand why the right has not been conferred upon all classes of Crown tenants ; but probably the Minister will explain hia reasons when the Bill coraos up for its second reading, In tlio meantime, the terms upon which 0011 version is permitted to Land for Settlement tenants are certainly unique. The tenant has to pay the present value of the land, less his interest in tho unexpired term of his lease, and his interest in the value of any improvements effected by him, or to the value of which he is entitled. Wo need hardly say that ur.der this provision it would be quite possiblo for a tenant to acquire the freehold at a less price than the original value. Wo know of lands in this electorate which were originally valued at £1 per acre. The improvements put on this land have equalled £5 per a<Vre, and the unexpired interest in tho lease would be worth a good deal. The land itself cannot be sold to-day at more than £G per acre, so that the lessee would l>o able to buy it at a less price than it originally cost. The Government has endeavoured, no doubt, to meet the objections of those who claim that there is a certain unearned increment in the Crown lands whioh should go to tho State. The attempt, however, is an exceedingly clumsy one, and ..if tho clause were put into operation it would result in endless confusion. How, for instance, i 3 the Government going to determine tho value of a tenant's interest in an unexpired lease? May it not happen that the State will mako a very bad bargain? If a tenant has been earning 20 per cent on tho capitalised value of his selection, has he not a right to assess his interest in tho unexpired lease on this basis? And supposing there conies a slump in the markets, or an international crisis, how is the State going to faro over the transaction ? Then, as to the improvements, how are they going to bo assessed? What is meant by improvement? These questions will present almost insurmountable difficulties. We confess that, on a superficial examination, we do not like the proposals for conversion, firstly, because they do not embrace the renewable lea's&s, and secondly becauso the conditions appear to be impracticable. There are several other provisions in the Bill whioh have a good deal to recommend them. The idea of giving preference at the ballot to those who have been twice previously disappointed is a good one. The proposal to allow holders of- National Endowment sections to exchange for other sections is open to the objection that a good detil of the endowments at pre- | sent in occupation may come back to the State and never again be offered or occupied. The provision which en- : ables the holder of a grazing run | which is subdivided to luave a priority in the selection of one of the sections is not objectionable other than that it establishes a somewhat awkward precedent, It presupposes the right of a tenant to an interest .in an estate which' really belongs to tho Crown. With other portions, of the Bill we have not space to deal in this issue. We can only say that the measure, as brought down, is capable of being developed into something which would give a distinct impetus to land settlement in tho Dominion,