NATIONALISATION OF THE LAND. 109 



Mr. R. Richards expressed the view that no valid argu- 

 ment had been adduced against the nationalisation of the 

 land. It was essential for the community to have control 

 over agricultural land which would, as industries developed, 

 become urban land. 



Mr. John Evens believed that private enterprise had 

 increased agricultural production and helped to win the 

 war. Forty years ago Agriculture was enabled to carry on 

 because the landlords came to the help of their tenants 

 when disaster overtook them. 



Sir A. Hazlerigg remarked that all agreed that the 

 nationalisation of the land involved a vast horde of Govern- 

 ment officials, and what could be worse ? 



Mr. Lane Fox, M.P., another visitor, said it was well to 

 have ideals, but it was necessary to consider the cost of 

 attaining them. No one had suggested a basis for estimating 

 the cost of nationalising the land. 



Mr. Haman Porter voiced the feeling of labourers that 

 they had at present no part or lot in the land. 



In replying on the discussion, Mr. Tumor said he agreed 

 with many of the objects which the advocates of land 

 nationalisation had in view, but he thought they could be 

 obtained by less costly methods. Nationalisation was a 

 political experiment. He suggested the system of occupying 

 ownership, which had achieved such good results in other 

 countries, as a practicable alternative. It was stated in all 

 official reports that small holders were not in favour of buying 

 their holdings, but the possibilities of purchase had never 

 been properly explained to them. When this had been 

 done they altered their views. Let us get the land into the 

 best condition first and then the nation might consider the 

 advisability of nationalising it. 



