"The Digger."

Digger (Invercargill RSA), Issue 20, 30 July 1920, Page 8

"The Digger."

FRIDAY, JULY 30, 1920. iATTERS OF POLICY. It is very doubtful whether the Government intends to give consideration to mattei^j of policy, from time to time determined by the Annual Conference. At any rate, the Prime Minister has definitely refused to set up a committee of the House, whose duty it would be to report on the policy of the R.S*.A. as expressed in questions submitted to Parlimentary candidates prior to the last generakelection The Minister of Lands is found lamenting the fact that so few applications come from returned soldiers for bush land, but the Government itself has decreased. the attractiveness of this class of land through failure to provide adequate security for the settler by giving hini sufficient advances to effectually get a start. However, the Minister is apparently not disppsed to be influenced by any aspect of the R.S.A. policy which has a direct bearing upon this important phase of settlement. The Discharged Soldier's Settlement Act makes provision for certain advances which the R.S.A. have consistently advised the Minister were inadequate. Bush settlement means going into the backblocks with no good roads^telephone, or house. The bush has to be fallen, and it is a considerable time before the setler gets a retprn, which in its initiatory stages is very srnall. By the time the land is fenced, sown, and all necessary work is executed, it has meant a considerable outlay of money which the average man has not got, For a settler to have to go to work and earn sufficient to keep body and soul tcgether while the land is needing his labour is neither in the interest of the soldier or the state. By the bringing into production our virgin country, we are following lines essential to the welfare of the Dominion. One of the first things a settler has to make provision for is a home for his wife and family. It is not suggested that it should be a luxuriant dwelling, but it is justly entitled to be one that will enable them to have a reasonable standard of comfort. The Act provides for £250 for buildings, and it needs no elaborating that it is

totally insufficient. The R.S.A. have consistently asked the Minister to increase the amount in the case of married meu to £400, with an additional £50 for each child. Even taking these figures into consideration we know that it is a very small standard of eojnfort than can ue attained by a man with a wife and family! In addition to the house there are outbuildings required, and yet the Minister does not seem to see that this is one of the f actors which makes f6r the set of conditions which lie deplores. The first thought of a man with a family is "what comfort can I provide for them?" and in the initiatory stages of the man's reasoning the proposition ceases to be attractive. It is further suggested that the amount advanced for stock be substantially increased. It is self-evident that, on the lowest estimate, a settler must have sufficient "turnover to keep his home going, to fall more bush, sow grass, and all other conditions essential to his progress, His rent has to be met and although it is not expected that his turnover will be of any magnitude, he must be in the position to secure as much stock as will, with care, keep him going until he has accomplished sufficient breeding and development work to do without a loan. Many a settler is to-day struggling to make both ends meet and is handicapped through not having sufficient stock. In the initial work essential to this clar of land, it is evident that some considerable time elapses before it is reproductive, and is there any valid reason why a proportionate amount of the rent should not be remitted? The land is being improved, and is an increased asset to the Dominion, and the Departments own money is safely spent. This will provide adequate security, and the remission of the rent for the first year or two would be an important factor in encouraging settlers and enable them to find a greater degree of stability.