CONTROL OF RENTS

Wairarapa Times-Age, 21 October 1942, Page 3

CONTROL OF RENTS

BILL BEFORE THE HOUSE

SOME CONTENTIOUS CLAUSES.

MINISTER ON WAR CONDITIONS.

(By Telegraph—Press Association.) WELLINGTON, This Day

The difficulty of providing adequate housing in war time was emphasised by the Attorney-General, ,Mr Mastn, when moving the second reading of the Fair Rents Amendment Bill, which occupied the House of Representatives for the greater part of yesterday’s sitting. The Minister said the whole purpose of the Bill was to see that people who behaved themselves properly as tenants were not ejected or subjected to extortionate rents. The Minister was followed by the Leader of the Opposition, Mr Holland, who suggested that the clauses other than those extending the duration of the original legislation should be held over till the December session so that interested parties should have opportunity of considering the Bill. In support of the appeal for postponement Opposition speakers emphasised \that many new contentious is; sues were included in the measure and that those affected should have an opportunity to state their case. Government members took the view that the need for the legislation was urgent and that there should be no delay in placing it on the Statute Book. The Bill was read a second time before the House adjourned at 10.30 p.m. till 2.30 p.m. today. Mr Mason said it had to be recognised that there was little prospect, of any easing of the housing position while construction was restricted through manpower and material shortages. In those circumstances it would be realised that the legislation was necessary while the war lasted and for a period after it. In the original FailRents Act certain types of places, flats and new houses, were exempted in order to encourage the building activity of that time. But today there was little prospect of new building, and the Bill was very much needed. In war time things had to be. done which would not be done otherwise. Dealing with the Bill in detail, MiMason explained that it was enlarged' to cover all houses and places used, as dwellings. Under the old legislation it was a question of degree; here there was no question of degree. Licensed premises were the only exemption. Discussing the provision making tenancy agreements binding on mortgagees, the Minister expressed the opinion that in most cases the clause would be found not unreasonable. In some instances it might fall harshly on the mortgagee, but he thought that in practice it would work out well enough. , , Mr Mason said that the.clause making it an offence to refuse, to let io people because they had children was taken from Australian legislation. The problem of how to deal with propertyowners who refused children was a serious one, and the clause tried to meet the position. . He thought that a provision making it an offence tor a property-owner to inquire whether a prospective tenant had any children oi whether it was intended that a child should live in the house to let was going a little too far. He. therefore intended to move its deletion in the committee stage. In reply to an Opposition member, the Minister said that in case of dispute, a fair rent was arrived at by a magistrate. A definite basis was not laid down by the Bill. The whole idea in the Bill was to prevent rents rising and every rise must be justified. Hardship would of course be taken into account. .