Farmers and Politics.

Press, Volume LX, Issue 18094, 9 June 1924, Page 8

Farmers and Politics.

Without much discussion the Provincial Conference of the North Canterbury branch of the Farmers' Union resolved on Friday to have nothing to do with a Farmers' Party in polities, j Though there were some differences of opinion in the reasons given, the es- | sential clause in the motion carried, ! that "it is unwise and impolitic to "engage in the strife of party poli"tics," showed clearly enough that the agitation for a Farmers' Party is not bearing fruit iu Canterbury. "We gather also from the reports in Southern papers that the farmers south of the Waitaki have very much the same opinion as those on this side. The Otago Provincial Conference considered a remit last week from its Clinton branch, which, though it "recognised that some action "in the political field is necessary," urged that the Conference should adopt the principle of "a country bloc drawn "from all parties," and "strongly "oppose the formation of a distinct "country party." Becauso other country branches had not had time to express an opinion the remit was referred to them first before being adopted by the Provincial Conference; but of tho six delegates who took part in the discussion, four favoured the remit, ozie apparently favoured it, and tho sixth "did not think they could do much "better except perhaps by forwarding "the question of preferential voting." So there can be no doubt that Otago is definitely opposed to a separate country party; and what it means by a "country bloc" is probably no more than a body of members especially attentive to country interests. We have always agreed in "The Press" that there is a good deal to be said for common action by farmer members of the House in all cases in which farmers' interests seem to require .special attention. If a country bloe is just a Parliamentary union of country members —a temporary economic union whose members do not forget that they have a higher allegiance—little can be said against it and a great deal for it. All that it would really involve would bo organised instead of merely individual attention to producing interests. But if a, bloc meant a group in Parliament interested in nothing but the advantage of one section of the community, a body of members who supposed that the beginning and end of their duty was to gain some 'advantage for the man on the land, and that Parliament is merely a place in which interest fights interest for plunder, it would be a very unfortunate addition to the groups existing in public life now. It would, in fact, be a Farmers' Party without the responsibility to the rest of the community that farmers, if they formed a party, would realise that they had to assume.