COMPENSATING PRICES

Press, Volume LXXIV, Issue 22340, 2 March 1938, Page 7

COMPENSATING PRICES

Dominion Chairman Explains LEGISLATION ALREADY IN EXISTENCE

As it was impossible for primary producers with prices determined by world competition to carry on their industry under a cost level increasingly in excess of the overseas price level at which their produce is sold, they demanded the only apparent alternative, that they be paid a price which would compensate them for the disability which has been forced upon them. In these terms Mr J. H. Furniss, chairman of the Dominion organisation of the compensating price movement, explained the plan' to a recent meeting of Banks Peninsula farmers at Duvauchelle Hall. Mr S. J. Vogan, vice-president of the Banks Peninsula Fawners’ Union, presided. Mr I. L. M. Coop, president of the provincial branch, and Mr H. Wil- . kins. South Island organiser of the campaign, were also present, Mr Furniss said that the farmers’ demands under this movement were: (1) To enable them to pay competitive rates of wages; (2) to allow them reasonable interest on capital invested in their farms and stock; (3) to enable them to meet the increased costs imposed by legislation, including tariffs; and (4) to allow them a remuneration commensurate with both service rendered' and obtained by other members of the community. Election Promises The promises made by the Labour Pkrty before the, last election. were outlined by the speaker. The Hon. F. Langstone had issued a booklet called “Labour Has a Plan.” This analysed the position and fixed the disability under which the farmer is suffering owing to the disparity between costs, internal prices, and overseas prices at the difference between £ 1000 sterling —the selling level —and £24oo—the New Zealand cost level. Farmers were not concerned with the accuracy of Mr Langstone’s analysis, but it illustrated the seriousness of the disability imposed upon exporting primary producers. Mr Nash, in an article published in the “Taranaki Herald,” stated that the guaranteed price represented the fulfilment of promises made, and ensured to the farmer “his fair share of the national income.”

Mr Furniss said there was a drift of skilled labour from the land. Farmers had to depend upon unpaid labour, and there were many women and children forced into work on the farms. The average efficient dairy farmer’s return, as defined by Mr Nash,'was £4. a week, plus £1 10s, a week house allowance. He instanced the fact that the manager of a factory •with an output of 1200 tons of butter per annum, which was the averagesize factory, received £lO a week, plus milk, butter, fuel, and a free house. This was not an implication that the factory manager was overpaid, but he considered the disparity between the remunerations could not be justified. Farm Workers’ Wages Mr Furniss said the farm worker should receive a standard wage comparable with other workers. The farm worker received £3 5s a week under the Agricultural Workers Act. This represented Is Id an hour for a 60hour week, a scale of hours frequently exceeded on farms. They had invited the Government to compare, this worker’s wage with other workers wages. The lorry driver picking up the cream received 2s 8d to 2s 9d an hour for a .44-hour week. If the farm worker received 2s 8d an hour for a 60-hour week his wages would be £B. Did Mr Nash consider he was measuring the farm worker with the same tape as other workers? If wool continued to drop the same disastrous position would arise, because costs had been built up which any Government would hesitate to alter. He warned the woolgrowers not to fall into the trap of asking for “a guaranteed price,” but to ask for a “compensating price” to maintain-their status. . ~ , If it was deemed necessary that sufficient wheat should be grown in New Zealand to enable the' country to be independent of outside supplies in case of emergency, then the wheatgrower should be given a price which , compensated him for the increase in costs which has been forced upon him. Under present conditions the wheatgrower, except under a combination of. favourable conditions obtaining only in a very limited area, would soon be unable to carry on, and even in such favourable areas increasing costs would eventually render wheatgrowing impossible. Paying the Price

In answer to -the question of how the compensated price could be paid, Mr Fumiss said both Mr Nash and pr. W B. Sutch had agreed that the price to be paid to the farmer should not be fixed in accordance with the price received for his produce on overseas markets, but should be determined solely by costs and other factors m this country, and that there was no barrier to this being done. Mr Langstone also concurred in this in ms booklet and stated that no financial difficulty would be experienced in giving effect to it. In reply to a further questioner, who asked if it was correct, as stated by Mr Nash, that under the guaranteed price the dairy farmer had received £350,000 more than he would have received on the open market, Mr Furniss agreed this statement had been made. He drew attention to the fact, however, that, according to statistics compiled by the New Zealand Cooperative Dairy Company, the dairy farmer had suffered a loss of £6,000.000 in increased costs at the same time. Mr Fumiss stated that the Hon. W. Lee Martin, Minister for Agriculture, on the same platform with himself at Pukekohe, had said he was in complete agreement with the compensating price as • set out under the four points, and that legislation was already provided under the Primary Products Marketing Act to give effect to it. The'promises made by the Government were in essence the four points of the compensating price. Legislative provision' already , existed to give effect to them. Mr Nash and his financial adviser were agreed as to the feasibility of giving effect to them. It.only remained for farmers to unite , behind the movement and success was assured, ... Mr Fumiss concluded by stating that it was a matter of great satisfaction that the. National Party had adopted the compensating price, as expressed under the four points, as a plank in its platform. It was evident that the importance of this reform in the interests of farmers and the nation generally was realised, and it brought it definitely nearer accomplishment.