Source document: https://docs-lawep.s3.us-east-2.amazonaws.com/1698069545621.pdf (Guyana)
SECOND LEGISLATIVE COU�Cll (Constituted under the British Guiana (Constitution) (Temporary Order� Provisions) in Council, Wednesday, 1953 and 1956).

1st June, 1960.

The Council met at 2 p.m. PRE�ENT: Speaker, Chief Secretary, Attorney-General, Secretary, Financial His Honour Sir Donald Jackson Hon.

D. M. Hedges Q.C.

Hon.

A. M. I. Austin, W. P. D'Andrade (acting).


ex officio .t The Honourable Dr, C. B. Jagan -Member for Eastern Berbice " B.ff, Benn (Minister -Member for Essequibo River Resources) of Natural (Minister of Trade and Industry) " Janet Jagan -Member for Western Essequibo (Minister Housing) of Labour, Health and .. " Ram Karran " ,· - Member for Dernera.ra-Essequibo (Minister of C'ommunicntions and Works) " " B. S. Rai -Member for Central (Minister velopment Demerara of C<1mmunity and Education).
De­ Mr. W. 0.

R. Kendall ., R. C. Tello ,, F. Bowman ., S. Campbell ,, A. L. Jackson ,, S. M. Saffee �, Ajodha Singh ., Jai Narine Singh ,, R. E. Davis ,, A. M. Fredericks ., H. J. M. Hubbard ,, A. G. Tasker, O.B.E.

-Member for New Amsterdam Member -Nominated -Member for Demerara River -Member for North Western -Member for GeorRetown North Berbice -Member for Western -Member for Berbice River -Member for Georgetown South -Nominated Member Member -Nominated District Member -Nominated Member.
-N,cJminated Mr.

I. Crum Ewing - Clerk of the Legislature Mr. E. V. Viapree - Assistant Clerk of the Legislature.

ADSENT: Mr. L. F. S. Burnham - Member for Georgetown Mr. E. B. Beharry - Member for Eastern Demcrara __.

Nominated Mr. R. B. Gajraj Member.

Central The Clerk read prayers.

1087 Oral Asking and 1ST JUNE, 1960 Answering of Questions 1088 MINUTES The Minutes of the meeting of the Council held on Thursday, 26th May, 1960, as printed and circulated, were taken as read and confirmed.
ANNOUNCEMENTS L EAVE TO M EMBERS Mr. Speaker: l have to announce that the hon.

Member for Eastern Dem erara (Mr. Beha rry) reports that he is indisposed and unable to attend today.

The hon.

Member for Georgetown Central (Mr. Burnham) reoorts that he is unable to atte nd during the early stages of today's meeting.

PAPERS LAID The Minister of Trnclc and Industry (Dr. Jagan) : On behalf of the hon.
Min ister of Labour, Health and H ousing, l wish to lay on the Table the Annual Reports of the Central Hous ing and Planning Authority for the years 1955-1958, together with the Certificates and Reports of the Director of Audit thereon.

GOVERNMENT NOTICES Mr, Jackson: Mr. Speaker, I beg to intimate that, with your permission, I wish at the appropriate time to ask to move a Motion for the suspension of the relevant Standing Order to enable me to move a Motion concerning which l have already consulted you.
ORAL ASKING AND ANSWERING OF QUESTIONS several parts of the British Common weal th and the United States of America, and how many have returned to the Colony during the same period of time?

The Chief Sccretf'.ry (Mr. Hedges) : r regret that the form in which statistics of departures from and arrivals in British Guiana are kept does not allow of the question being a nswered in the precise in which it is asked.
Complete form figures are kept only of departures to the British Caribbean Territories, including British Hond uras and the Bahamas, to other Commonwealth countries as a whole, and to all foreign countries.

In addition, a record is kept of persons go ing to the United Kingdom to take up permanent residence.

With regard to Guianese who return to British Guiana only the total figure is available, no re cord being kept of the individual coun tries from which they are returning.
The available figures for the period 1st January, 1958 to 3 1st December, 1959, are as follows: Guianese Departing: British Caribbean territories (including British Honduras and the Bahamas Other Commonwealth coun tries (including 1,100 who left to take up -permanent residence in the United Kingdom) All foreign countries Total Guianese Rewrning: 7,361 3,473 9,241 20,075 17·658 Mr. St>cakcr: Question No.

11.
11.

DEPARTURE AND RETURN OF GUIANESE ADMINISTRATION OF GEORGETOWN PRISON Mr. Jackson: 1 beg to a~k Question No.

10 standing in my name on the Order Paper.

Will the H onourable Chief Secre tary say how many Guianese left the Colony between the 1st of January, 1958, anc.l the 31st of December, 1959, for the Mr. Jackson: I beg to ask Question No.

11 standing in my name on the Order Paper.


In view of the fact that a Prison Officer was murdered in the Georgetown Prison, does the Government propose to order an inquiry into the administration t I 1089 Motion-Sympathy with 1ST JUNE, 1960 People of Chile 1090 of the Prison Department, and if so, how soon?

The Minister of Community Devel opment and Education (Mr.Rai): No Sir.
Unhappily, the late officer neglected to comply with a written order from the Director of Prisons reminding Prison Officers that prisoners Douglas Lewis and Wilbert Henry who were being confined in the Punish.ment Section of the Prison should only be unlocked in the presence of two officers and then only when all the other prisoners in that Section were in their cells.
The late officer released prisoners James and Lewis from their cells at the same time and allowed his assistant to remain out in the Exercise Yard while the two prisoners were in the Punishment Section with him.

The need for constant vigilance is being impressed on all Prison Officers, both in the interest of their own safety and the security of the Prison, and a repeti tion of the circumstances which resulted in the death of the Prison Officer is un Ji.kely in the future.
ORDER OF THE DAY LAND BONDS ORmNANCE 1959: REPEAL PROPOSED Mr. Speaker: Councii will rcsum-:: debate on the following Motion: "Whereas enactment of the Land Bonds Ordinance, 1959 (No.

21) has caused dissatisfaction and grave concern the among Colony: landed proprietors of the ' Be it resolved: That this Council r,ecommends the repeal of the Land Bonds Ordinance, 1959."
But before we proceed with this Motion, I think it might be appropriate, Mr. Jackson, if you wish to move the suspension of relevant Standing the Order, to do so now.

SYMPATHY WITH PEOPLE OF CHILE.

Mr. Jackson: I beg to move the sus pension of the relevant Standing Order to permit me to move the Motion which ·~s been circulated.

The Motion reads: "Be it resolved: That this Council expresses its profound sympathy with the reople of Chile in the serious calamity wt1ich has befallen their country.
And be it further resolv~d: That this Council recommends to Government that steps be taken to render financi al anJ other forms of material relief."

Mr. Speaker: The Standing Order under which this notice is given is No.

24, that is: "Notice shall not be dispensed with in the case of a motion, or in respect of a ny proceedings for which notice is re quired.

except with tbe consent of tbe Speaker and the unanimous assent of the Members present at the time."

I give my consent.
I give my consent.

Q,1estion put, a nd agreed to.

:!v1otion carried unanimously.

Mr. Ja,ckson: Mr. Speaker, one hardly expects that there will° be any con troversy as far as this Motion is con It is known that the people of cerned.

Chile have suffered and are still suffer ing from the results of a calamity which came upon them in very recent days.

thousands of lives have been lost, homes have been destroyed and, as far as has been reported, there is great distress in that land.
Countries have already taken action with respect to rendering aid of one kind or another to those who are suffering, and it is my view that we in this country can and should join with other countries in the world to express our sympathy to the relatives of people who have lost their li,ves, those who have lost their homes, and to the State in general.
We in this country are fortunate that we do not have such calamities; and per haps it might be difficult at times to appre ciate to the fullest extent what such suffer ings a re like: nevertheless, it is my con viction that all of us in this Council will share iympathies with those who are suffering.
1091 Motion--Sympathy with 1ST JUNE, 1960 People of Chile 1092 [MR. J ACKSON] I think the time has come to ask that when we are extending our sympathies with those who are suffering in Chile we also do so in a very tangible m anner.

It is true that our circumstances are bad, but not so bad that we cannot show that sympathy in a very tangible m anner, by offering financial aid and other forms of materi al relief.

I heartily commend this Motion to this Council.


The Minister of Labour, Health and ( Mrs. Jagan ): 1 second th is Housing admirable Motion moved by the hon.

I think M ember for Georgetown North.

every Member in this Council, represent ing as we do, in one _form or another, the people of British Guiana, feels the utmost sympathy for the people of Chile who have suffered such misfortunes as tidal waves, earthquakes and so on.
Moreover, we who also live on the South American continent must feel a brotherhood for all those people living in this area.

that Certainly theirs is one of the greatest disasters the world has seen in many a year.

The people of British Guiana should express their sympathy through the correct channels, so that the people of they have Chile will appreciate friends and sympathizers all over the I agree that we should take steps world.

to see what relief other than financial is possible.
Only a fe w days ago I was ap proached by an organization which felt the same way and was anxious to send blood to Chile .

H owever, because of the geographical position, I found , speaking to the doctors in charge of the blood bank, it would have been very difficult to send blood to Chile and in the quantities which we have available here.

Guiana would be able to express its sym I take pleasure p:ithy in a tangible way.
in supporting the Motio n. Mr. Hubbard: Mr. Speaker, George Bernard Shaw once wrote that " Nature is red in toot h and claw".

The recent events in Chile point to the truth of that st:1ternent.

Unfortunately, when we look at natural calamities such as those the people of th at poor So ut h American co untry have had to endure we come to r..:a lize that though " nature is red in tooth and claw", nat ure is not so terrible as man.
What the people of Chile and the Pacific have suffered in consequence of these natural upheavals is no whit as great as the suffering of the people of Nagasaki and Hiroshima in consequence of the brutality of man himself.

And I would in contemplating these great and like, moving events, to draw so me philosophy from them.

What I think we must realize is th:-:t nature is terrible, but m an is still nature, and nature even moreso.
We can con template the disaster in Chile without any passion and without an y necessity to place blame on any one person or set of per sons.

We therefore can draw fully upon the reservoirs of the human side of our nature: kindness and charity.

We can see in this natural disaster the brother hood that is in all of us; and I think, Sir, that it is fitting when we have the oppor tunity, to look upon th e deeds of nature and of men a nd use the experience of the one to temper the acts of the other.
I heartily support the proposal that our sympathy and our assistance go out to our brothers in Chile.

It is appreciated that this is a small country and that we would have to con tribute within the limits of our resources.

I understand that there is a move afoot for certain organizations in British Gui ana to get together and collect money and clothing and other things which migh t assist the people in their time of disaster.
So that with some assistance from Gov ernment added to that, I think British Mr. Campbell: 1 rise ·to give my whole-hearted support to this Motion moved by the hon.

Member for George town North.

lt is very lamentable to hear of the results of this a wful natural calam I heard that in the West Indies ity.

scientists are beginning to record shocks.

A ll along we in British Guiana have been safe from such natural calamities, but one never knows.
We are under the level of 1093 Motion--Land Bonds l sT JuNE, 1960 O~d.-Repeat Proposed 1094 the Atlantic a nd I am su re that if thi.

: Atlantic were to rise just a round IO ft. with a tidal wave the suffering that would come to the people of these parts can be imagined.

The nearest highland above the sea level is 25 miles away from the City, at Atkinson F ield.

Anyway, I am always grateful to the Creator for our be ing spa.red such dis:istcr~.

Question put, Mot ion carried 1111-• animo usly.


LAND l30NDS ORDINANCE 1959: RF.PEAL PROPOSED Mr. Spcak~r: We shall resume the debate on the Motion, moved by the hon.

Member for D cmerara Ri ve r, as follows: "Whereas enactment of the Land Bonds Ordina nce, 1959 (No.

2 1) has cau~~d dissatisfaction and grave concern '.tmong the C olony: landed proprietors of the Be it resolved: That this Cou ncil re commends the repeal of the Land Bonds Ordinance, 1959 (No.

2 1) ."
2 1) ."

I was not present when this Motion was moved, but from the records I notice that the hon.

Nominated Member, Mr. Tello, was speaking at the tim e of the adjourn ment.

It does appear also from the re cords that he began to speak from 4.25 p. m. and that the adjournment was taken somewhere about five o 'clock.

If the re cord is accurate, it seems to me that be fore he can continue, there must be some Motion to extend the time of his speak ing.

Mr. Fredericks: I beg to move that the hon.


Nominated Member, Mr. Tello, be given an extra half-hour to speak.

Dr. Jagan: Speaking on this Motion- - Mr. Spe:,,ker: Just a moment.

Dr. Jagan: Speaking on this Motion just moved, Sir- - Mr. Speaker: I th ink the rule says that it must be put wi thout amendmen t or debate.

Mr. Speaker: Standing Order No.

35( l) states : "The mover of an original motion shall not be limited in the duration of his speech on such motion or in reply.
(2 ) Subject to the preceding paragraph of this Standing Order, a Member shaTI not be entitled to address the Council for more than 30 minutes on an y subject: that Provided the Council may, by motion made and carried wit hout amend ment o r debate which shall set out the extension, extend the tim e limited by this Order."

I3y this particul ar Standing Order I am prcclucled fro m accepting an amendment, or to permit a debate.

I shall have to put th e question accord ingly.


The question is, tha t Mr. Tello be permitted to continue ror 30 minutes more.

Those who are in favour, please say " Aye"; those who a re agn in•3t, please say "No".

None against; the Motion is carried.

in I was introduci ng Mr. Tello: On the adjourn ment I was trying to impress on this Council that it is my considered opinion that the Government erred the L and Bonds Bill, without first fulfilling trying to certain prerequisites.
prove to Council that already British Guiana has on its Statute Book adequate legislation for dealing_ with any man who hoards the expense of the economy of the country.

Before G overn m_t!nt had given thought to the introduc tion of legislation as expressed in the Land Bonds Ordinance, certain prere quisites should have been attended to.
land at I express the opinion that, in view of the fact that this piece of legislation was on the Statute Book, the G overnmen t should have moved to intensify its interest in providing markets, local and foreign, in order to show the small fa rmers that markets are available for marketing their I recognize that Government is produce.

to appoint a M arketing taking steps l t is a step in the right direction, Officer.
and it is a credit to the Government, but L make the point t hat this has come after, rather than before, this hostile piece of legislation.
109,5 Mo(ion-Land Bonds l sT JUNE, 1960 Ord.-Repeal Proposed 1096 [MR. TELLO] I repeat that the Government has not done enough to educate our p easantry in relation to acce pting scientific agricultural methods, a nd accepting what is necessa ry in these mode rn times in o rder to produce econom ically a nd f:nd a place in a com petitive marke t. l repeat that the Gov e rnment erred in introducing this piece of legislation, and the hon.
Mover is quite correct in h is :1ttempt to remove it from l hope to continue to t he Stat\!te Book.

prove that there is merit in the Motion, I do not know if I h ave impressed o n this Co uncil what I feel, :rnd what has been made known to me by :1ssociating with the general public, There is a con siderable am ount of uneasi ness on the r,art of t he sm::ill landowner.
When I say landowner, I mea n people who small own between one to a hundred acres of bnd-people who -own land at tremen dous sac rifices, by closing their eyes to many necessities of life, by depriving thei r c hildren from obtaining prope r education and by adopting a standard o f livi ng ;m1ch lower than what is accepted.
I have already said that in some cases these people have invested every penny in orde r to pay cash fo r their parcel's o f land, a nd that others who could not raise the money to pay cash are still burdened by the heavy rate of inte rest on mortgages, These people, n ot having easy access to money with cheap interest, a re rather nervous about G overnme nt's true intentions behind the introduction of the Land Bonds Ordinance, I , for one, feel very unhappy over the enactment of the Land Bonds Ordi nance.
I, like others who are worried about it, tremble at the very mention of of the Land Bonds Ordinance.

The position is this: ma ny of those wide a reas of land tha t a re now undeveloped, a re not undeveloped from me re choice.

The lands in most cases are not inherited, but were bought by people who are finding diffi culty in getting money at low interest to devclop the entire area.
It is not human to t:.1ke all you own a nd put it in one basket merely to w:.1tch nnd wait It is not no r mally human to do that, a nd that is the reason why some land remains unde veloped , to pay When the Governments of Trinidad :ind Ba rb:;dos investig::ited the cause of a simil:.1r type of trouble.

they discovered that the source of the trouble w::is the unavaifability of money :1t low in te rest to c!.·velop the land.

T hey pa~scd legi.
T hey pa~scd legi.

;l ation :1nd made Banks available to the' people who required loans , I haw alre::idy quoted from the Trinidad legislation and J need not quote it again.

J believe it is accepted that in Ba rbndos and Trinidad people can borrow money to develop the ir lands.
At one stage loans were only ava ilable fur developi ng the l:rnd, but it w:1s soon recognized that it was not a n easy task to keep the lands well developed on the very small margin of profit, meet the burden of the high cost of living, and p ay off loans on a heavy, two interest-bearing mortgage.

Those Governments legislation in onler that obstacle.

The results are tha t peasants are now more who!

e-heartcclly interested in developi,ng the agricultural economy of their coun tries.
in troduced fo r a nd remove to sometimes Tn British Guiana it is known that the C redit Corporation is there, but the the Corporation moves machinery of l am not sayi ng that it is rathe r slowly.
I am not an expert not doing its best - but I know that there in such matters - are times when money is needed in a 1natter of hours, and the machinery in the Credit Corporation takes weeks or months to finalise J!,atcers I say that if Government were truly interested in developing the healthy agricultural economy of this country, in orde r to assist the people a nd enable them to retain the ownership of their they wou:d have followed the example of the two Islands, l have referred to, and would have made loans available at a low rate of interest.
However, that is not the case, and that is why the masses of the peasants and farmers look askance at the Land Bonds Ordinance.

lands, 1097 Motion--Land Bonds lsT JUNE, 1960 Ord.-Repeal Proposed 1098 Wh y nullify the very good service that this Government rendered the colony when they passed the La nd R egistry Bill?

T hat Bill gave the fa rmers in the rural areas confidence that the land would be theirs in the end.
At the time the ordinary man felt that Government were anxious to let him have a deed for his I-and as well as to maintain freehold ownership.

But almost on the heels of this bit of progres sive this destructive, the Land Bo-nds Bill.
they came with faith-destroying Bill , legislation· Often f, myself, feel that possibly Government were not so kindly disposed to the Land R egistry Ordinance them selves, but it might have been too much of a political dynamite to play with be cause the public had known that certain steps had been taken by the previous Government to make provision for a registration of title Bill.

Whether Govern ment were sincere or not, let us believe that they were sincere about it.
Im- mediately after the law was passed, there was an enormous crowd at the first sitting of the Court; everybody rushed to make use of the opportunity of obtaining titles If you desire further for their lands.

evidence to show that it is the will of the people to own land on a freehold basis it is their preference-that has been fully demonstrated by the number of people who rushed to the Court.
into thought of false tremble at I fear tha t there will be no real sense of h;:;ppiness until the minds of the people are made easy.

I only hope that the Land Registry Ordinance was not intended to sense of a lull people security.

Today we the very the Land Bonds O rdinance.

Almost every day I read in the newspapers, hear over the radio, or at some public meeting, that Government do not have sufficient power.
Let us imagine what the positio n would have been like with regards to the health of the agricultural economy of British Guiana, if the peasants and farmers had power to make lh,eir purchases of necess ary equipment like tractors, h::irvesters, and ploughs.

Every man who owned a piece of land would have been able to get equipment to develop it.

He would have been able to purchase fertilizers and pay good wages to his workers.
What a healthy agricultural economy we would have had in this country if the farmers and peasants could purchase with bonds.

Those poor people have no such power, so they have to struggle within their limit ed means.

Many of them have already paid off for their lands and are contribu ting abundantly to the economy of the country, but they are beginni ng to lose f.aith; their future is insecure.
They spend sleepless nights wondering what the mor row holds for them with land bonds hove ring over their heads.

I am submitting to this Council that the Land Bonds Ordinance is not a good thing for British Guiana at this stage of its development.

1n our Development Programme la rge sums of money have been allocated to -agriculture, and this piece of legislation presents a hurdle in the way of this most important aspect of this country's development.
After all, the knowledge that one owns a piece of land which one can bequeath to posterity gives one confidence and a stake in the country.

I fully agree that in the interest of the country the Government should have the right to control the use of land.

It is the doctrine of my Church.

The Catholic Church concedes that Government should have tl1e right to control the utilization of land, but it does not agree that it has the ng;it to deprive a person of his land.
Pope Pius XIIJ · in his famous E ncyclical, said: ''The right to possess private properly is derived from Nature, not man; and the State has by no means to abolish it, but only to control its use and bring it into harmony with the interests of tile public good ," the right in I fully agree that the use of land must be controlled the interest of the com munity as a whole.

but I also believe in the dignity of man and his right to own and bequeath property.
The quotation I have just made is simply the doctrine of the Catholic Church, and as we are not all Catholks it is only fair that I should refer to something of wider application.

Fortunately I came across in "The Sul'l- 1099 Motion-- Land Bonds lsT JUNE, 1960 Ord.-Repeal Proposed 1100 · [MR. T ELLO] issued by day Argosy'' of the 29th May, a state ment the Christian Social Council of British Guiana from which, with Your Honou r's permission, I will quote one or two short passages.
J quote: " If the State is to achieve its purpose the Government must exercise authority that is, it must have the power to make - laws and to enforce them.

This power is something which comes from God Him self.''

It goes on to state: is to serve 'Though Government rules, the task of those who govern tire people.

Those in aut.hority have not been put in power to satisfy their human vanity or for self-aggrandisement.
ft would be an abuse fo r those in power to use their authority , not to promote th e common good but for their own ends - to feather their own nests or to pay off old scores."

The statement continues : lo ri~ht '·Beca use God wishes us to serve Him , He must dearly have given each one a the conditions claim and a necessary for this- service.

No authority gi ven by G od to thf' Sta ff' can override these natural rights giver: by God to tire .. the ind i vidual.
right to acqui re private property (the only material guarantee of personal liberty)."

Sue , nghts incl Lide take heed of To dep ri ve a person of the right to own property and to bequeath it to his children is to practise another fo1m of slavery worse than the one from which h uman h ei.ngs have been emancipate<;!.

I feel that Government must this Motion and thereby re-establish the con fidence it temporarily won when it passed the Land Registry Ordinance.
The large army of people w ho turned up at the firs t sitting of the Court for the registration of their titles to la nd is in itself evidence of the will of the people to own land.

I statements h ave quoted made by Church dignitaaries, and with Your Honour's p ermission I would like to quote from the H oly Bible itself.

It is r~ corded in Proverbs, C hapter 13: from "A good man leaveth an inherilanc.
: to his children's children;" H ow is it possible for a man to leave an inheritance to his children if he is not per- mitted in the first instance to own pro perty?

Ownership of land is most import ant in any pa rt of the world.

It is said that th ose who own the land own the country.

This point of view is sustained by the Holy Koran and by other Hindu writings.
T should li ke to quote Chapter 4 , verse 7 from the Koran as translated by A. Yusaf Ali: "From what is left by parents and :hose nearest related there is a share fo r men and a sha re for women.

Whether the property be small or large - minate share.·• a deter There is another ,quotation from Manu Samriti , Verses 264-265.

The writer is accepted uni versally as a Hindu Law G iver and Phi losopher, whose book was compil ed in the Second Century, B.C.
I quote: " If anyone confiscates land, fie ld, garden, etc.

of another, l10ust'.

the King s hould fri ghtening the owner, fine him 500 gol d coins.

If it is done unknowingly, the fine should be onl y 200 gold coins."

the There are many of us in this Council and elsewhere who· have lost respect for Holy Writ and regard for time-honoured writ ings and princi ples.
In this Council I have heard references m ade to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights on several occasions by Members of the Government whenever they found it convenient to do so in support of some argument.

I propose their example by quoting to follow Article 17 of the United Nations Charter: "Article 17 ( I ) Every one has the right to own property alone as well as m association with o ther~ .

(2) No one shall be "-rbitrarily de prived of his property."
maintain that whacever is this Govern ment's secret intention in introducing the Land Bonds Bill, it is accepted through out the length and breadth of British Guiana that that piece of legislation was in tended to give Go ve rnment the power to purchase bnd held by people freehold and put it into a common pool of land which Government proposes to distribute on a leasehold basis.
During the debate 1101 Motion--Land Bonds l sT J UNE, 1960 Ord.-Repeal Proposed 1102 on the Budget I asked what Government proposed to do with lands which were acqu ired and paid for with land bonds, and the hon.

Minister of Natural R e sources (Mr. Benn) replied that such lands would be added to the pool of Gov ernment owned lands.

He thus made it quite clear that his Government propose to perpetuate the policy of leasehold in preference to freehold land ten ure.
So there is no misunderstanding about it.

I have challenged the Government over and over to bring a Sessional Paper to this Council.

The Minister of Natural Resources (Mr Benn) : A White Paper.

Mr. Tello : A White Paper is just ano ther description for a Sessional I asked Government to bring a Paper.

White Paper to this Counci,l so that all of us will understand, quite clearly, what is Government's policy with regards owner ship of land and, further, there will be no misunderstanding in the future.
Mr. Speaker: Only o ne minute more!

tried Mr. Tello: The hon.

Minister of Communications and Works to make out in this Council that I had sup ported the Acquisition of Land (Land Settlement) Bill, but I said I had three reasons fo r so doing.

Firstly, I wanted to stop land hoarding.


Secondly, in this Ordinance there is provision for con trolling the purchase price of such land to enable people, who would sub sequently own land, to buy easily and cheaply; and thirdly, in order to pass this Bill, there had to be a special interpre tation for land settlement schemes.
This is what it says : " "land settlement scheme" includes any project intended to secure land for the establishment of fa rmers as a n organ ised settlement or for distribution by sale, lease or otherwise to persons individually for agrioultural purposes."
So that the Land Acquisition Bill was intended to prevent the hoarding of land; it was passed so as to keep the price thirdly, of la nd down and within the reach of the to make small people; and land available in small parcels so that people can buy cheaply, either indivi dually or collectively.

l strongly support the Motion and would be terribly dis appointed if it is not passed.
Mr. Fredericks: [ had not intended to speak on this Motion, but as I will not be voting in its favour, I desire to offer a few remarks explaining my reasons for not so doing.

The hon .

Member fo r Demerara in presenting his Motion, has River, stated that land represents a person's wealth and as such he is free to use his savings to purchase or to sell land at a In other words, land is a com p rofit.
modity which can be aoquired or sold without any Government restriction, or acquired by any means such as bonds.

L disagree with this viewpoint and cannot see how my friends on this side of the Table will support this M otion.

land - lt devolves, Land is a source of any country's economic wealth; it is the means of pro duction, consequently, we must recognize that nature the fundamental principle should intends that the earth - be used by all the people in a proper manner.
therefore, upon the Government to enact laws so that the principle of private ownership - its in is recognised and also dividual aspect - its social aspect - that is, its utilization in interest of the common good.

In this respect I would like to quote from the Hansard report on the debate on the L and Bonds Bill of the 30th September, 1959. lt is not often that I quote from Members on the other side of the Table, but l will make this an exception.
I would like to quote the Minister of Com munications and Works.

When referr ing to New Zealand, he said: the "Land is there as a national asset and a ny individual who suggests that land can be kept idle because the owner of it holds a piece of paper - cannot den,):'.

that it is a very grave sin to those barren fields see mankind is suffering for employment."
that alongside a transport - 1 1103 Motion--Land Bonds 1ST JUNE , 1960 Ord.-Repeal Proposed 1104 [M R. FREDERICKS] I do not think anyone here would disagree with that.

I would like, also, to quote from the speech of the Mini-ster of Natural Resources in the same debate on this Land Bonds Bill on the 30th Sept ember, 1959.
H e, also, was qouting from the Hansard of the 5th April, 1957, and he said: "That Governments of the area ac cept th:e concept that the use of land m11st be re3;inkd not only as the business of the owner but also as !he proper com·ern of the community as a whole and lo pro vide legislation to give practical effect to interests of this concept.

Where tenants conflict with landlords and/or those of the community, the inlerests of the community should prevail."

the is It Sueµ development.


I heartily agree with the Minister of Natural Resources.

therefo re wrong, I submit, that land should be held as a commodity to be b ought or sold or for anyone to encourage land acquisition without action would be inimical to the best interest of In the circumstances I the countr_y.
cannot support Bonds should be accepted for land not benefi cially occupied - as it would be in the interest of the common good to do so - and it devolves upon the community as a whole to make sure that the bonds so issued would become more valuable as time goes on.

In the circumstances, I would not support the Motion.

this Motion.

to Mr. Ta,.,ker: I cannot endorse the comments of the hon.

Nominated Mem ber, Mr. Fredericks.


It seems to me that all the arguments we have been hear ing on th is Bill have, in fact, been directed the Acquisition of Land (Land Settlement) Ordinance, 1957, and It was made perfectly not to this one.

clear, when this Ordinance was passed last year, that it was designed to provide a method of paym ent for a certain type of land - unbeneficially occupied land.
T hough I was not present at that debate, I have read the Hansard acco unt and while anybody, given a free choice, would prefer in any circumstances to be paid in cash for land acquisition, never theless, because of the particular pro blems of British Guiana and the shortage of cash, I find it very hard to see how land bonds cannot be regarded as an acceptable alternative, provided that the legislation provides a reasonable safe guard, as this Bill does.

The F inancial Secretary, in the de bate.


was at some pains to point out the basis on which it had been drafted, and the small area in which it differed from similar legislation in Jamaica.

I have no intention of supporting the Motion, but 1 do hope that Government will take accou nt, again, of the concern which is so obviously felt over their policy for I seem to have heard muc h the land .
same speeches on the previous Motion; certainly, we had some of the same q uo tations: but it does seem that the fear, rnsofar as there is a fear, and a real fea r, goes back to what the hon.

Member for Georgetown Central said in the original debate on the Land Bonds Bill.
He pointed out that Section 14 of the Land Bonds Bill makes an Amendment to the Acquisition of Land (Land Settlement) Ordinance, 1957, and also that ther e was a suggestion in that Amendment - particularly since it had not been con sidered necessary to give any explanation that the in the Objects and R easons - Acquisition of Land (Land Settlement) Ordinance was going to be used to acquire land where the major part of any given parcel might be beneficially occupied .
In other words, that Govern ment had a hidden motive.

The hon.

the Attorney-General answered that point and made it clear that there was no such intention.
}-fo pointed out that all that this Clause was seeking to do was to ensure that if an area of land is to be acquired for land settlement, it must be established, first of all, what portion is beneficially occu pied or unbeneficially occupied, and that the Land Bonds Bill provides for the ve ndor to be required to take land bonds only for the portion which is not bene ficially occupied.
I think it is this mis understanding that has given rise, p er haps quite unfairly, to the suggestion that the Land Bonds Bill, because of this Amendment which it makes to the pre- 1105 Motion-Land Bonds l sT J UNE , 1960 Ord.-Repeal Proposed 1106 vious Ordinance, is designed to facilitate the acquisition by Government of bene licially occupied land; and it would go a long way to re-assure the public con cerned on this whole issue if during this debate, Government took the opportunity to assure once again this Council and this country that that is not their inten tion; that in fact it is not in the public interest to use this Land Bonds Ordi nance, or the Ac,quisition of Land (Land Settlement) Ordinance, in order to ac quire land which, so far as is practicable, is already beneficially occupied.
Mr. Kendall: Mr. Speaker, during the debate on· this Motion the Minister of Communications and Works in making his contribution observed that the Land Bonds Bill was the result of the passing of the Acquisition of Land (Land Settle ment) Bill by the previous Government.

[ refer to the Interim Government, of which I am still proud to have been a Member.

But the hon.

Minister, like his colleagues, always endeavours to find In this someone to lay the blame on.
instance, he has blamed the In_terim Gov In the Government's indecent ernment.

haste to lay this blame it has forgotten that since 1916 on the Statute Book of the Colony 'there has been the Acquisi tion of Lands for Public Purposes Ordi nance.
The Acquisition of Land (Land Settlement) Ordinance which was en acted in 1957 during the regime of the Interim Government actually was a measure which repealed and re-enacted Chapter 180 - the Acquisition of Land ( Land Settlement) Ordinance of 1943. lt might well be that Government has forgotten and a little reminder is ncccs the Government, Gary.

Mcrnbeos of however, should be conversant with the files handed over to them by the previous Government.
One of the main reasons why the 1957 Ordinance was passed was because in certain parts of the Colony-I think in Essequibo-there was a great need farming.

A particular for estate wa$ up for sale.

When the pro- land for prietor realized that Government was in terested, the proprietor sold the estate to a relation of his for a sum of money far above what he would have received ordinarily, so that if Government bought, Government would have had to pay what the previous proprietor sold for.
Gov ernment therefore thought of acquiring the land, but Chapter 180 was inadequate, and the new Bill was drafted, introduced and debated and later passed.

The main reason why I am not sup porting this Motion before the Council lies with my fears over the attitude of the Government in relation to its land policy.

Some time ago the hon.

Member for Georgetown Central brought to the notice of this Council the fact that the Govern ment in power was discriminating in the issue of land.
There was a hue and a cry from Members on the other side that they were not given enough facts to satisfy them that the accusation was correct.

I can now refer to another case, to something which occurred in the last few days in New Amsterdam.

The hon.
The hon.

Minis ter of Natural Resources was approached by people from Canje for lands aback of Vryheid, and I heard that the Minister told them that the lands aback of Vry heid would be allocated to members of his Party or those who were prepared to join his Party, and that when he made the allocation, no Governor or anybody-- [ Cries of "Shame!"]

Mr. Kendall: There is no "Shame" about this.

The District Commissioner It is for the Min for the area was there.
ister of Natural Resources to reply and say whether it is true or not.

A Member: This is not the U.D.P.

!

Mr. Kendall: If the U.D.P.

were in power they would have used their I will power to distribute lands fairly.

a dd that there is a real fear existing in the country that the G overnment is dis criminating in its land policy and that only those people who are supporters of the P.P.P.

are being given lands, I would I l ~ 1107 M otion--Land Bonds 1ST JUNE, 1960 Ord.
-Repeal Proposed 1108 [MR. K.BND~LL] be pleasantly surprised if from all the allocations made within the last two years 25 per cent.

of the people who benefited are not members of the Party.

In fact I should be very glad if the hon.

Minister or the Government could make a state ment in this Council disproving what I have said.
The Land Bonds Ordinance should be repealed, for if Government is to ac quire and distribute lands in the way they ac-quire and distribute Crown Lands, then it would reach a stage where a good many of us who are contributing to the revenue of the country and who ari!

not suppcr ters of the P.P.P.

will not benefit in the distribution of land .

bers of this Council against the Majority Party and myself, and I refer especially to the last speaker, the hon.

Member for New Amste rdam.


Some Members want to drao- the Majority Party down to their ln 1954 when the Interim low le;,el.

in office they went Government was around telling people, " If you join the U.D.P.

you are going to get loans from the new Credit Corporation."

That wa<; what they were doing in 1954, and that is what they are accusing the P.P.P.

o[ doing in J 960.

Only recently when some American Company was preparing to in vest in housing, members of the P.N.C.
went around telling people that if they joined the Party they would get houses.

Even people who dislike our P arty would say that we have not sunk to such a low level.

It is a very unfortunate situa tion.

and I do trust that Government will change its policy.

Government should look to the country as a whole and re member land-hungry masses should rightly share in these benefits.

that the The Minister of Natural Resources kn ows only too well that only a few days ago he was approached by people from No.
45 Village on the Corentyne, who have been planting rice, for a small area of land and what he told them.

Whether he likes it or not, it has been given out that Government is only interested in people who arc interested in his Party.

It must be remembered that these lands are the lands of all the people of British Guiana.

Mr. Benn: lt would be unnecessary for me to speak at length in reply to questions ra ised by certain hon.

Members in this debate.


1 did not think of having tO recapitulate what I said during the debate on the L and Bonds Bill about a year ago.

Anyway, I do not think that I should have to go over all the points to justify the Land Bonds Ordinance of this country.

the What about this question of lands aback of Vryheid?

When l went to New Amsterdam about four weeks ago all the persons who applied for land were acquainted with the fact.

A Co-operative had been formed and they applied for land.
Several Nher people squatted on the land illegally.

I met the squatters and I sr,id that Government had in farmers.

terviewed members of the Co-operative and had decided to give some of them the lands.

l said that as there was enough land, those who were squatting could re main on the small holdings-some of them occupied 13 acres, others five acres.
That was said in the presence of the District Commis1,ioner, the Crown the Acting Permanent Lands Ranger, Secretary the Ministry of Natural Resources, and all of the farmers includ ing members of the Co-operative.

Some members of the Co-operative were most dissatisfied with the distribution, because the squatters had received more land, in dividually, than members of the Co operative.

On the other hand several members of the Co-operative were fairly satisfied with the amount of land given to them.
to What I must do is to try to reply to s01:1e of the slander and mud-slinging ,,,J,1ch were resorted to by certain Mem- In New Amsterdam, two weeks aiter, the same set of people came to me dissatisfied.

Some of the squatters wanted more land.

Indeed the verv nicllt after T 1109 Motion--Land Bonds l sT JUNE, 1960 Ord.-Repeal Proposed 1110 gave them perm1ss10n to remain on the land on which they had squatted, many of them took tractors -and ploughed more land than their share.
When the Crown Lands Ranger went on the land he found them wi th more land than they were en ti tled to under our agreement.

On Monday last 1 went to New Am sterdam where I held a meeting.

The District Commissioner, the Director of Drainage and Irrigation, the Permanent Secretary to the Ministry of Natural Re sources and the Commi,ssio ner of L ands and Mines were there.

After another meeting the farmers came to me and said that the squatters felt that they should be allowed to extend their holdings.
When we divided the land between members of the Co-operative, it worked out that each member would get 3 acres of land.

Many of the squatters got 5 acres of land-one even got J 3 acres.

l n spite of that they said that it was wrong to give the Co-operative land because members of the P .P.P.

were also members of the Co-operative .

They threatened to protest through tpe leader of the P.N.C.
l told them th at when the Leader of the Opposition Party wins the majority of seats in the Government he can do what he wants, but as long as I was the Min ister I would decide how th e land should be d ivided.

I also told them that if they were not careful, all of them who had squatted on the land would be thrown off.

This slander of the P.P.P.

and the District Commissio ner is wicked.

The hon.

Member for New Amsterd am said that the District Commissioner was pre sent when I said that only P.P.P.
mem bers must be given land.

The Majo rity Party set up a commi ttee to investigate this matter of land distribution, and the committee was comprised of the Land Development Officer, members of the the P.P.P., and P .N.C., members of school teachers who interviewed people all over the country.

This Government is now being slandered by those who are incompetent, and are not decent enough to come here I know and speak to a motion properly.
that several attempts have been made by members of the "O ppositio n" to stop the distribution of land in this country.

In 1958 a Motion was moved by the hon.

Member for Georgetown North calling fo r a Commission to investigate the dis tribution of land.

and asking ·that, until the R eport was submitted, no more land should be distributed.

They are still making other efforts to stop the distribu tion of land, although they say that they want to end unemployment.
This is one th ing that the present Government has been able to do.

What else have the members ::if the "Opposition" done?

They have gone all over the country trying to stir up trouble.

They brought a large delegation to me last week urging me to stop the d istribution of land in the Black Bush Polder area, because a few malcon tents were making noise about it.
As long as J am a Minister, as long as the Majority Party is in the Govern ment, and as long as we have power to do certain things, we are going to do them.

When the " Oppositio n" get ,a chance they can do what they like, but they should try, at least, to be decent and bring decent criticisms against the Gov ernment.

Mr. Tello started his distortion of the Holy Bible again.
I did not know that he would have r epeated the same arguments he used a week o r two -ago by quoting from Proverbs, L eviticus, from some H indu scripture, and from the Holy Koran.

The ho n. Nominated M ember does not understand that when certain th ings a rc read from the Bible they have to be read in the circumstances u.nocr which they occurred .

I used to teach scripture in school, and I want to teid1 the hon .

Member a little scripture.


You cannot divorce-you cannot take a verse out of the context and say that Solom,;n said in Proverbs, as the hon.

Nominated Member has been screaming here: "That you shall be able to bequeath to your family."
i 1111 Motion-- Land Bonds 1ST JUNE, 1960 Ord.-Repeal Proposed 1112 [MR. BENN] L ast week I quoted from the "Pro ceedings of the International Conference on Land Tenure and Related Problems in World Agriculture Held at Madison, Wisconsin, 19 51 " for the benefit of the hon.

Nominated Member, Mr. Tello.

Alfred Bonne, who was speaking on Major Aspects Of L a1td Tenure And Rural Social Structure in Israel said - before I quote let me remind the hon.

Member that he is the person from whom the Bible came.
The Bible is not a West ern invention; it came from the Middle East.

This is what the writer, who is a Jew.

said.

With your permission, Sir, I will quote from page 111: "The social co nscience of the Bible has reacted with the admoni tion that God is the supreme owner of the land ("then mine is the land " ) ; that the fate of the tiller of the soil is a primary concern of Society ("yo u s hall dwell in the land in safety"); and that "the land shall not be sold for ever."
I quoted from Leviticus last week.

The Jew continues to state : "This ideological heritage has been fully incorporated .. " The hon.

Nominated Member took his quotations from the Jewish Testament, but "The land shall belong to the peoplG"; "The land shall not be sold forever" are from that source.

The hon.

Nominated Member endeavoured to show that those who are taking away people's l and are not Christians; they are against Hinduism and so on.

He even quoted from Manu .


Today, in certain States, the Govern ment of India is taking away land fro m people if they have more than 30 acres.

A family of five is allowed 30 c:cr<.

:s of land.

Does the hon.

N ominated Member know more than the Indian whose main religion is Hinduism?

He condemns this Government for introducing the I ,and Bonds Bill, and he is now condemning the Government of India fo r the manner in which they are distributing their lands.
I am merely going over what I said last week.

The hon.

Nominated Mem ber quoted from the Koran, and I quoted from the words of a Member of the Gov- ernment of Pakistan, Muhammad Ali, who states: "Is Private ownership a natural human instinct?

We know that primit ive tribes in the early days of history lived a communal life in everv sense of the word and knew nothing of ·private ownership of property.
Everything within the domains of the tribe belonged to the tribe as a whole and not to any particular individual or in• dividual s. T his form of possession and ownership of property can still be seen in some parts of Africa which have not been touched bv civilization.

Islam has re cognized th·e communal ownership of pro• perty a nd has laid down rules governing it.
Europe in the Middle Ages also re· cognized the communal ownership of pro perty, when it was held that land was a gift o f God to His people as a whole and not to a ny particular individual."

Later on the writer attempts to show, and I quote him again: "This shows that the conception o f the private ownership of property is not It is by any means instinctive in man.

merely a conception which has been deve loped by man; .. " The hon.
Nominated Member will not agree with these quotations, but he will agree to the ones he has picked up somewhere or other.

I quoted from the Bible, and from a Jew who knows the Bible better than any Christian.

I have discussed the policy of the Government of India as well as the policy of the Gov ernment of Pakistan.

ln "Pakistan Affairs" , a publication of which l have, it will be seen that in some parts of West Pakistan land is sold t0 farmers, and in other parts land is not sold to farmers.
On the question of land bonds, the Government of Pakistan ac quires land under an acquisition law similar lo what _we have in this country.

and pays the people by issuing land bonds over a period of 25 years.

With your permission, Sir, I shall read from page 2, \ , 01 XII, No.
4, of "Pakistan Affairs" published on February 15, 1959, which state~ : 1113 Motion--Land l3onds 1 ST JUNE, 1960 Ord.- k epeal Proposed 1114 "The la ndlords will be paid fair com pensation for the resu med lands in the form of interest-bearing bonds redeemable in 25 years."

I believe every Member of the Legislative Council has a copy of the F arm Journal.

I think it is issued quarterly.

1 do not know what this Government I must do to satisfy the " Opposition."

expect opposition, but sensible opposition.


School Gardens 1958 1959 106 112 No.

of 4-ll Cl11bs n11d Young Farmers Clubs things?

Mr. Tello also spoke of what two other Governments are doing in relation to agriculture in those Islands.

H e men tioned Barbados and T rinidad, and he asked what this Government is doing in relation to the educatio n and diversifica tion of agriculture in this country.

[f the hon.
[f the hon.

Member does not read the news papers or listen to the radio, how can he expect to know certain H e should have read or heard of the bonus given to coconut producers, dairy fa rmers, citrus growers and so o n, or he should have spoken to the hon.

Nominated Mem ber, Mr. Davis, who attended the Agri cultrual Field Day at Mon R epos in August last year.

Every Member of this Council was invited to attend that func tion.

The hon.
The hon.

Member did not attend, and he is now asking what Government is doing.
I will quote from some statis tics to show what the Agricultural Depart ment has done by way of educating the farmers: Meetings attended and organized 1958 1959 ]958 19,9 1958 1959 1958 19.59 1958 i959 1,056 1,3 14 31 26 479 1,062 Film Shows D emonstrations Field Days Leaflets & /Julletins Published Agricu/111ral Fairs & Exhibitions 1958 1959 1958 195, Farm Joumals 16 35 3 1 30 6 7 4 4 1958 1959 1958 1959 TraininR Courses 40 48 6 6 The hon.
Member says that Govern ment is doing nothing to educate the farmers of this country.

Mr. Tello: I said that the Govern m ent did not pursue certain pre-requisi :ics which involved education.

The hon.

Minister has qu oted figures for 1958 while the Land Bonds Bill was passed in 1959.

Mr. Benn: The hon.

M ember is try ing to get himself out of a predicament.

Havi ng used his tongue so freely he has lost his head.
Now he attempts to cor rect himself on some of the points on which he used to babble and make a lot of irresponsible statements.

I shall now turn to one or two ques tions raised in connection with credit for farmers, particularly for the purchase of !and.

In moving the L and Bonds Bill I !old this Council that farmers in Zeelan dia, Waken aam, had bought lands for large sums of money, and having found themselves in difficulty they had come to me to help them to get assistance from the Credit Corporation.
They com plained of the high rate of interest they were charged and wanted the Credit Cor poration to take over their debt with re spect to their lands and charge them a lower rate of interest.

M embers will find that recorded in the Hansard report of the debate on the Bill.

The Credit Corporation still helps farmers to purchase la nd, and people in British Guiana are not prevented from purchasing land for agricultural purposes 1115 Motion--Land Bonds 1ST JuNE, 1960 Ord.-Repeal Proposed 1116 tMR.
BENN] or for cattle rearing.

What this Govern ment has said and continues to say is that the lands which it is developing and other Crown lands will be given out under lease.

I went through the whole matter with the hon.

Member for Demerara River, now the champion of landed pro prietors, but hon.

Members evidently do not read Hansard or remember what J said.

Perhaps I will have to say it all l shall deal with the Motion over again.

proper after replying to the statement by the hon.


Nominated Member, Mr. Tello, that Trinidad and Barbados were help ing farmers to buy land.

I want to say that in British Guiana the Credit Cor poration has always helped and is still helping fa rmers to buy land.

Not on!y that, the Corporation also lends money for 1ice, cocoa and citrus.

Some Members may say th at the money advanced is not enough, but no system is as good as we would wish it.
The fact is that people are getting agricultural credit both short and long term. '

for agricultural production- The hon.

Member for Demerara River, who was elected by the votes of sugar workers and others of the working class in this country, having deserted the Party which helped to get him elected, has now gone over completely on the side of those whom he has described as landed proprietors in this country.

Who are the landed proprietors who are mak ing a big noise?

I think the hon.
I think the hon.

Mem ber knows the President of an Associa tion who wrote a long letter to the Com missioner for the Government of India asking him to do something to prevent this Government from passing the Land l s he representing the gentle Bonds Bill.

man who also wrote a letter to the United States Government asking them to in tervene against this Government for pass I happen to know that Dr. ing that Bill?

Rajcoomar, Commissioner for the Gov ernment of India, did not treat him too nicely.
That is the type of landed propri~ tors the hon.

Member is supporting, some of whom own whole islands with people working under most inhuman conditions.

Some of those landed proprietors have lands up river under bush where one can hunt, and they are the type of landed proprietors who will never vote for a working-class man.

But the day of reckoning is coming, and the workers will decide whether the hon.

Member was clcctecl to this Council by them or by the landed proprietors whom he now cham pions.
The landed proprietors to whom the hon.

Member referred are not people with 10 or 15 acres of land who are applying to the Credit Corporation for loans to develop those lands.

Those landed pro prietors who are said to be afraid- I do not want to look in the direction of cer tain hon.

Members when I speak-- Mr. Speaker: Be impersonal.

Mr. Benn: I was looking at t he hon.

Member.

The landed proprietors who, he says, are afraid a re the big land eel proprietors.

The landed proprietors to whom the hon.


Member refers must be proprietors li ke Bookers.

Well, we shall see.

In replying to the debate on the Motion I do not have to go into the merits of the Land Bonds Ordinance, but merely to deal with some of the remarks made by certain Members.

The hon.

Member for Eastern Dem erara said that the distribution of land was his idea.
H e slander ed the Minister of Trade and Industry by saying that he was in office for three months in 1953 and did not give out one acre of land, but he had given out more land than we could imagine.

We all know a bout the land the hon.

Member for Eastern Demerara was giving out, and when the bubble burst it was fo und that a lot of the releases to the Press about land being given out here a nd there were just propaganda.
That was one of the reasons why the Govern ment had more or less to give the boot to the person who then held the port folio of Minister of Natural R esources.

The hon.

Member says that the distribu tion of land was his idea.

With your 1117 Motion--Land Bonds 1ST JUNE, 1960 Ord.-Repeal Proposed 1118 perrmss1on, Sir, I would like to read an the People's Progressive extract from Party's Manifesto for the General Election in 1957, prepared when the hon.

Member was perhaps at some stall.


I quote: "The P.P.P.

considers that the future welfare and development of B.G.

depends on the availability of adequate areas of land suitably drained and irrigated.

To wards this end the Party plans to have: 1.

A programme of land reclama tion whereby large areas of land along the coastlands and rivers, abandoned to bush and swamp, can be made avail able for agricultural purposes.

2.
2.

An equitable distribution of agri cultural lands, and a change in the sys tem of crop and stock production, with special emphasis on a more effective utilisation of the land.

3.

The setting up of a land commis sion to investigate the possibility for the acquisition of land, its development and land settlement.

To formulate a posi tive policy as regards land settlement which will embrace agricultural planning for the achievement of a balanced economy.

The need for diversification.


dairy and livestock farming is essenthl in land settlement."

The Manifesto goes on to enumerate a considerable number of things which the Party intended to do when it got into office, yet the hon.

Member for Eastern Demerara said the distribution of land was his idea.
I think the Minister of Communications and Works did him a great honour by suggesting that the Land Bonds Bill was his brain child, but the fact is that he was only carrying out the policy of the Party which is the Govern ment, and that is what we all have to do as Ministers without running around and taking credit to ourselves.

Mr. Speaker: One minute more!

Dr. Jagan: I beg to move that the hon.

Minister be allowed to continue for another 30 minutes.
The Minister of Communications I beg ~d Works (Mr. Ram Karran): to second the Motion.

Question put and agreed to.

~ ' Mr. Benn: The hon.

Member said that when he drafted the Land Bonds Bill his intention was that when lands were acquired and paid for in bonds those lands would be given out on a freehold basis.

What we are concerned about is not what the hon.


Member wanted to do as an individual, but what the political party which brought him here wanted to do, and as a Minister of the Government he was put here to carry out the wishes of the Majority Party, like any Minister of any Government in any part of the world.

The hon.

Member takes credit for himself.

What were the other points which came before us during the debnte on the Land Bonds Bill?

The hon.
The hon.

Mem ber, Mr. Tello, spoke about a White Paper again.

Must I tell him what is the policy of this Government in relation to land before the whole question of policy is worked out?

Must I say what the former Member for Agriculture, Forests, Lands and Mines (Sir Frank McDavid), a most capable person no matter how we dislike him, said on the question of formulating a comprehensive land policy?
Must I read out all the decisions Govern ment has arrived at regarding agricultural and grazing leases on Crown lands, and decisions with respect to Colony lands in land settlements?

No.

Government has no objection to peo ple purchasing land.

The fact that the Majority Party introduced the Land Reg istration Bill is evidence that this Govern ment is in favour of people who nave private lands continuing to own them.
The Government will do nothing to prevent people from buying private land; and this is personal: if you look in the Official Gazette of last Saturday, you will see that I am purchasing a piece of land myself.

I wonder if that will satisfy you.

Govern ment is not against people purchasing land.

What else?

On Crown and Colony land, leas~s of 25 years will be given renewable at the end of each term provided that the person who owns the land has it in beneficial I do not remember all the occupation.
ingredients of the decision which I read ~out in this Council, but if hon.

Members 1119 Motion-Land Bonds 1ST J UNE, 1960 Ord.-Repeal Proposed 1120 (MR. BENN] would read the Hansard of a meeting of two weeks ago, they would see this is the same thing which I said.

I would not like to be a gramophone record and re peat myself, but Government remains wedded to its policy.

Government main tains that the Land Bonds Ordinance is an Ordinance which is suitable to the needs of this country.
The Government rejects the Motion moved by the hon.

Member for Demerara River.

Mr. Jackson: Last week the Min ister of Natural Resources made this very famous statement: "It is easier to hold back tomorrow than to hold back Com munism."

Today he makes another to the famous statement writer from whose book he quoted; and he said in quoting, that the writer, who was a Jew, knew the Bible more than any Christian.
in referring Now, Sir, no one challenges the right of the Minister to make references to books written by anyone.

It is his right as Minister so to do, or as a Member of this Council so to do.

But surely, when he goes out of his way to belittle men of learning in the manner in which he has done, it is something which someone ought to make a passing comment on.
I am aware that there are men of learning in the Christian faith-men who know, 1 assume, as much as the writer from whose book he quoted, and there are people who know far more than that writer; and I would say that every Mem ber, to put his point forward, would choose any one portion of a book or of the Bible or from any other document, to support his contention.

That is why he has the opportunity of replying to any thing the hon.

Nominated Member, Mr. Tello, has said thereon.


I think as one who has been brought up in a Christian home; as one---who tries to understand the Christian Bible; as one who tries to understand not only the Christian but the philosophy of other writers, and as one who tries to grasp the religious tenets of all the other groups of people, I do not think it is fair for the Minister to make this comment.

Mr. Benn: I did not say the Christian Bible.

The portion which the the hon.


Member quoted was from Hebrew Scriptures.

Mr. Jackson: The Minister said: "a Jew who knows the Bible more than any Christian", and all I ~m trying to do is to point out-better still if what he said is meant to be a reply-that his com parison should not be a Jew with a Christian, but a few with a Jew.
I was saying that I have every re gard for men of learning and also for the Minister who is a man of learning, but I shall not say that the Minister has a high degree of learning.

And the Minister has a very good habit of making state ments in this Council during his speeches and of leaving his seat when persons are to reply to what he has said.
Perhaps, that is another degree of learning which the Minister has acquired over his years, and one would expect if that is learning, then he would demonstrate it wherever he goes.

In his reply to the Motion, the Min ister referred to the fact that in 1958, 1 moved a Motion in this Council seeking to get a decision to suspend the destribu tion of land until an inquiry is made into the manner in which previous allocation,; were made.
I want to remind him that that Motion resulted from the discovery of an injustice done on the Essequibo I want to remind him that the Coast.
course was one which concerned a Mr. William Bailey who was, at the time, occupying beneficially, and rather effi ciently, 5½ acres of land in a certain area, and that when the land was re claimed or resumed, the area which was cultivated by Mr. Bailey was taken away from him by the Committee and Mr. Bailey was sent to another area to cul tivate virgin that as a result of that Motion and the debate which took place, Mr. Bailey had his land restored to him: so that if :m ::tttP.mnt I know land.
1121 Motion--Land Bonds 1ST J UNE, 1960 Ord.-Repeal Proposed 1122 to bring about a suspension of the clistri bution of land is to be regarded as an act of abusing the People's Progressive Party, then I have no apology for taking that course of action; for by taking that course Mr. Bailey got back the 5½ acres which were taken from him and given to another person.

We, in this Council, are here to oppose injustices as often as we find them done; but listening to the hon.
Minister's observations I could find no point on which he ever did reply to the Motion.

He had been abusing other political part ies and other Members of this Council in his contribution to this Motion.

In his introduction of the Land Bonds Blli the Minister said that one of the prima1y objects of the Bill was to provide ~m I wonder if the Minister ployment.

would indicate to what extent unemploy ment has been relieved by the passing of the Land Bonds Bill in October, 1959.
As far as one is aware, the un employment figures have been increas ing very rapidly and they have, by now, reached an unprecendented number.

So that if the intention of the Government was to provide employment for the un employed, then one must ask the ques t ion : "Why has not the Government pur chased any of the land which has not been beneficially used?

Why has it not purchased those lands from last October up to now under the law which they operate?
Has Government purchased yet, any land under the Land Bonds Bill If it has not, how passed in October?

can it be argued that the Government is interested in the finding of relief for the several thousands of people who have been unemployed since 1956, 1957, 1958, and those who are leaving school?"
So that if the intention of the Land Bonds Ordinance was to give Govern ment an opportunity of finding employ ment, then that Ordinance has not yet served its purpose; for we cannot say whether anyone has found employment as the result of the existence of the Land Bonds Ordinance.

The Minister quoted Professor W. Arthur Lewis.


Professor Lewis was, at that time, his mentor; I notice he has found many more since October and I wonder how many more he will find be If the Government's policy fore 1961. is one based upon balancing the economy of this country with a view to making progress, for which we all hope, then it seems to me that the policy of the Gov ernment needs recasting; and that is why I am supporting the Motion for a repeal of the Ordinance.
The Minister, himself, a week ago informed this Council that several tenants of Government estates have been unable to pay their rents.

He quoted the,se figures: "Charity Anna Regina Vergenoegen Government Estates Cane Grove Onverwagt Mara $ 2,540.40 49,186.41 24,974.74 4,346.78 25,669.01 9,122.19 3,848.62" which is approximately $ 120,000.

One must ask the question, "How much money has been spent by Government in the preparation of all these land Settl ment Schemes"?
That is a very import ant question, for the lease of land is at 25c.

per acre.

It can be seen that at no point of time can the Government ever hope to get ade•quate payment or returns from Land Settlment Schemes.

So that if the Lands Bonds Ordinance was designed to take, purchase or acquire lands belonging to people and to pay them by way of bonds, it can be asumed that the cost to the country is going to be astronomical and the economic results would be disas trous.
It is clear to my mind that this country cannot afford to embark upon a scheme of this kind.

Government will possibly pay out millions of dollars in bonds and the people who will cul tivate or acquire the lands thereafter will bring to Government very little revenue It will amount to putting as a result.

the burden on one set of people while others get the benefits.

i 123 Motion-Land Bonds l sT JUNE, i960 Ord.-Repeai Proposed 1124 !MR.

JAC!.SON] I still hold the view that there is discrimination.
Only last week I pointed out that while Government was allowing some people to run into arrears in respect of monies owing to Government, other people were distressed for arrears.

I would rather support this Motion and be accused of taking the part of the there is one large landed proprietors - hon Member on this side who has a large area of land- than support the contin ued existence of the Land Bonds Ordi nance.

I have been accused of ,support I said last year that people ing Bookers.
are accused by everyone of some bias or the other when one stands up for princi ples.

I have never submitted myself to big business.

As a matter of fact, I am not one known by big business, and I know big business will never offer me anything which is considered an attempt to take away my conscience.

Last year the hon.

Minister referred to Bookers.

Today he referred to Book I say it is unfair and improper for ers.

Government to have its eyes on lands which are already prepared.
Instead, land should be reclaimed and provided It is most dishonest with good drainage.

for Government to have its eyes on lands which are properly drained and irrigated with a view to telling those who own them, "as you have no use for them, we will take them away."

But "bonds" is "Bonds for pen now a popular word.

sion."

"Bonds for gratuities."

"Bonds I am reminded that in for everything."

present-day Cuba issuing bonds is the pattern of the Government.
I hope that our Government will find itself facing up to the payment of these bonds.

The Attorney-General (Mr. Austin ): I think it is recognized in this day and age that ownership of land carries with it not only rights but responsibilities towards the community.

This is especially so in countries which are land-hungry, as is British Guiana today.

In my view there is a war going on in British Guiana and the enemy is eco- nomic waste.
There are too many people living at subsistance level, and the energies of this Government are bent on trying to improve their lot and the lot of everybody else in this country.

One can not deny that the greatest chance of suc cess lies in trying to make the best use of land, that can be used beneficially for agricultural purposes.

This situation in which we find ourselves today has been faced in other countries at different times.
During the war it was felt that in England, an island which depends so much on imports for its food and welfare, every square yard of agricultural land should be put to benefic ial use, and it had to be so done.

If there was agricultural land which was not used to the best advantage, legislation would be brought forward to oblige the owner to do so, and if he failed the land should be taken away.

And land was taken away from people who did not make the best use of their land.
Such legislation was repealed only a year or two ago be cause it was felt that the situation as regards land and food generally in the United Kingdom had changed and it was no longer necessary to keep that legisla tion on the Statute Book.

In Jamaica where similar needs for the best use of land have been felt.
it was decided that if the Governmnt re quired land to improve it and enable it to be used, but did not have the money to pay cash for land it would not be un reasonable to oblige the owner to take land bonds in p ayment.

Land bonds are really a compulsory loan by the owner to the Government.

In 1955 a Land Bonds law was passed in Jamaica provi ding for the issue of bonds in respect of the compulsory acquisition o f certain types of land.
The first type was des cribed as follows : "Land in parcels of fifty acres ana upwards comprising the whole or part of an estate decla red by the Governor in Council to be in his opinion substantially unused by the owner or occupied for tile purpose of renting the tenants in terms not exceeding five years or in parcels not exceeding ten acres e~ch."
A 1125 Motion-Land Bonds lsT JuNt, 1960 Ord.-R.epeal Proposed 1126 It was considered a perfectly proper measure in Jamaica to oblige those who held land which they did not use to accept bonds as satisfaction of the acquisition cf the la nd, which was going to be used by Government for the purpose of settling people upon it.

The law was passed in a country which is one of the leading territories of The West Indies and which is respected for its Government and gen erally for the way it conducts its affairs.
We in British Guiana consider that it would be perfectly proper to follow the pattern set by Jamaica in this respect.

It is not, as some Members suggested, a Machiavellian creation to expropriate land from those who have land today.

Why is it not a measure designed to grab good land?
Because the whole spirit of the Ordinance, when read with the Acquisition of Land (Land Settle ment) Ordinance, to which it is comple mentary, is that the land in question is land which is not beneficially occupied or used for agriculture.

k I am going to refer to the 1957 law which sets the pattern or background to the Land Bonds Ordinance.
Where the Government wish es to acquire land which is being made full use of, of course, it has to pay the market value of the land; but in respect of land which is not being bene ficially used, it was felt it should be ac quired at a value which is in keeping with its purely utility value.
Section 5 of the Acquisition of land (Land Settlement) Ordinance, 1957, states that the value should be: "either the capitalized value of the net annual income which would be de rived from the use of the land for agricul ture after deducting the estimated capita l expenditure on improvements required tu bring the land into a state fit for use as aforesaid or, the price paid for land ( ex clusive of any buildings, plant and mach inery on the land) by the person who owned the land on the 1st July, 1955."
This sugcgsts that, as the amount of capi tal that would be required to be spent on improvements to bring the land into a fit state for agriculture has to be taken into account, the land, at the time, is not in a fit state for agriculture.

The object of the Ordinance is to deal with land that is not being used properly.
In order to provide safeguards for owners of land, there is a section under which independent Commissioners may k appointed to report on whether it i-s in the public interest that the land should be compulsorily acquired.

What they have to take into account is whether or not it is in the public interest that the land should be acquired for a land settle ment scheme, having regard to the fuct that the land is nO't beneficially occupied or used for agriculture.
It is quite clear that the pattern of this legislation is such that it is designed to deal with land that is for agriculture, although it could be so used if improve ments were made to it.

largely not used It has been suggsted that it is possi ble that a large area of land might not he beneficially occupied and could be used as a land settlement scheme without spending money on it to bring it into a fit state of agriculture.
It has also been suggested that a small part of a large unused area might be beneficially occu pied, and that a land settlement scheme would be frustrated if the small area so beneficially occupied was not acquired at the same time.

Government can tum the situation around and say: Let us take this opportunity of acquiring land that is beneficially occupied at its utility value, and a certain small area that is not beneficially occupied can act as a token purpose for the acquisition.
I say categorically that it is not the intention of the Government ever to It abuse the spirit of the Ordinance.

has never entered into the consideration of the Government that they should, in stead of paying the full value of land which is being made proper use of by its owner, resort to this 1957 law in order to virtually seize land without oiivim• 1121 Motion-Land Bonds 1st JUNE, 1960 Ord.-Repeal Proposed 1128 [THE ATTORNEY-GENERAL] proper compensation for it.
Indeed the Land Bonds Ordinance includes a ,section which amends the provisions of the 1957 Ordinance dealing with Commissioners, and it states that when the Commis-sioners report on whether a certain parcel of land should rightly be acquired for land settle ment in the public interest, they must state specificially the portion of the land that is not beneficially occupied and the portion of land, if any, that is beneficial ly occupied.
The reason for that is that the Lands Bonds Ordinance provides that no landowner shall be obliged to accept land bonds in satisfaction for the acqui sition of land if that land is beneficially occupied.

If the Commissioners, under the 1957 law, report that an area of land is suitable for a land .settlement scheme and should be acquired in the public interest, they may say, for example, nine-tenths of the land is not beneficially occupied but one-tenth is.
On that statement it may be argued that the one-tenth of the land which is benefically occupied should be acquired because without its acquisi tion it would jeopardize or prejudice the land ,settlement scheme.

In that event Government can exercise its right to issue bonds for the nine-tenths of land which is not beneficially occupied, and must pay cash for the one-tenth of land which is beneficially occupied.
the reasonableness of In the light of the safeguards and the reasonable provisions that I have pointed out, no well-intentioned person can ques the Land tion Bonds Ordinance, nor indeed resurrect doubts as to the intentions behind the 1957 Acquisition Land (Land Settlement) Ordinance which is complementary to the Land Bonds Ordinance.
It is mischievous to impute that it is the intention of this Government to misuse the 1957 legisla tion in order to acquire land from land owners who are making use of their land and pay them a price for it which would be patently unjust.

These charges might be made if actual cases can support them, but not now.

I defend this Land Bonds Ordinance as being a perfectly proper and democratic legislative measure.

Mr. Campbell: .

The hon.


Attor ney-General has made a wonderful de I have listened to his fence for the Bill.

advice, but I am afraid that a large pro portion of the people in this country are confused over this matter.

Hon.

Mem bers have already expressed the view that there is confusion and fear about the ul terior motives behind the Land Bonds Ordinance.

The Land Acquisition Ordi nance, No.


13 of 1957, was perfectly right in making such a provision, because at the time there was an abuse of land holdings by big land holders.

The whole of the Demerara River is owned up to now by absentee landlords.

Nobody can get a piece of that land for farming, so that that Ordinance was quite in order.

But the aim of the Ordinance was to acquire land from those who were just hoarding it and keeping it away from bona fide farmers who wanted land to farm.
The law said, I think, in Section 2 of the 1957 Ordinance, that the lands when acquired from people who were not using them were to be sold, leased, or otherwise given to the people who de It was also taken for granted sired lands.

that Government would pay cash for the lands acquired, under the 1957 legislation.

That was quite alright, but some fear creeps into the matter of the 1959 Land Bonds Ordinance.
The P.P.P., which happens to be the Government, has a definite policy of leasehold as opposed If Government has to freehold tenure.

any good intention it would repeal the Lands Bonds Ordinance so as to allay that fear.

What is the fear?

The fear is from the ideological angle.

Every body knows that the leaders of this Gov ernment are Marxists, and the philosophy of Karl Marx is that the State must take control of all the resources and wealth of the land.
Agricultural lands produce wealth, and if this Government believes in Marxism or Communism it stands to rea son that we will have State farms and collectivism in this country.

1129 Motion--Land Bonds 1ST JUNE, 1960 Ord.-Repeal Proposed 1130 We see some danger in this Land Bonds Ordinance and we are hoping against hope that it will not be put into operation according to the Government's I hold that the right ideological beliefs.
to own personal property is inherent in man, although we are told the contrary by those on the other side of the Table.

A man who owns a piece of freehold land feels that he has the right to work and develop it, and no one should want to deny him that right.

A farmer on a land settlement scheme would be happier in mind if he knew that he and his family could work in peace and develop his holding if he knew that he could own that If we have a piece of land eventually.
contented farming community in British Guiana the whole country will be pros perous, but with a disgruntled farming community we will have anything but harmony.

Government's function should be to safeguard the natural rights and lib erty of the family; not to endanger them.

The whole world is in turmoil, with some people fighting for power for the sake of power, Absolute power corrupts, absolutely.

Power should be used for the common good, for the benefit of man kind.
Sometimes the word "community" is used as a smoke screen.

The word ''peace" has lost its meaning, and some people are using the word "Democracy•· to serve their own ends.

About eight months ago, when the Land Bonds Bill was being debated, I concluded my re marks thus: "I am nc, land owner.
I have got a kind of a lease, but when I see a Bill like this coming here for my blessing I am certainly not going to give it, because it is not reasonable; it is not logical, un less the Government is entering into a new kind of experimentation of socialising and communising the land.

If that is the aim, well let us hear it.

We will then know what to expect."

[Official R eport, 30th September, 1959, Col. 1936.J Today I am still of that mind, and I am supporting the Motion.

Mr.
Mr.

Bowman: We have only about five minutes left before the time for the Adjournment.

What I have to say in reply to the debate will take much longer than that.

Mr. Spea.ker: Do you intend to reply?

Mr.

Bowman: Yes, Sir.

Mr. Speaker: Well, I will be pleased if you begin now.

Mr.

Bowman: We have been de bating a Motion which was activated by a most iniquitous piece of legislation.- I that think Mr. Speaker: is enough.
You have begun, so that I shall know when next the Council meets that you are to resume your reply to the de bate.

Council is adjourned until two o'clock tomorrow afternoon.