AGRICULTURE IN ENGLAND

Press, Volume LXXIII, Issue 22245, 9 November 1937, Page 12

AGRICULTURE IN ENGLAND

PROTECTION BY TARIFF DISCUSSED VIEWS OF LORD HARTINGTON craou ova ow cobre3po«d*»t.) LONDON, October 23. Lord Hartington, Under-Secretary for Dominion Affairs, who visited New Zealand last year, discussed the position of British agriculture with his constituents recently. He is reported by the “Derbyshire Advertiser” to have said that it would not be practical politics to close the door to the products of the , Dominions.

The position of British agriculture had improved, he said, but no one could claim that it was satisfactory, in spite of the steps taken, such as the derating of the land and the large sums of taxpayers’ money being devoted to subsidising agricultural production. England could not survive in peace or war if agriculture went downhill, but no matter what protection he had the English farmer would not be able to produce much cheaper than at present. Whatever Britain did could not alter a fact of Nature, that the production of most primary products could be carried on cheaper overseas. In New Zealand the grass in most places grew for 11 months of the year, and it was unnecessary to provide housing for cattle. Obviously, New Zealand could produce and market dairy products much cheaper than Britain could, and British farmers suffered from that. , "Theorists, Socialists, economists, and other ’ists talk of nationalisation of the land,, eliminating the landlord, lower rents, security of tenure,” said Lord Hartington, “but the root of‘the matter is that the farmer wants more money for the things he produces, so that he can pay higher wages and prevent men leaving the land, which is a serious thing. He cannot get that while things are being brought into the country cheap.” The Government was urged by a section of the press to impose heavy duties and give the home producer a free market. He wished things were as easy at that. Such a policy could not succeed. In the agricultural field . the Dominions were almost as heavy competitors as foreign countries. It could not do the farmer any more good to have his throat cut by Dominions’ competition than by Danish competition. Denmark was about BritainV rest customer in the world, and if Danish and Dutch products were excluded those countries could not buy from Britain. That would create unemployment among the urban population which depended on those markets, and it was going to hit agriculture from another angle. It was not practical politics to close the door to the Dominions’ products. They were British customers and they depended almost entirely on agriculture. Another vital reason against tariffs on agricultural products was that if the Government raised the price of those products they hit the poorest of the poor. That was a conclusive reason why the simple tariff policy was closed to agriculture. The Government had been compelled to fall back on the alternative of quotas, boards, and subsidies, which had been able to satisfy hardly anyone.