WORLD FEDERATION OF FARMERS

Press, Volume LXXXII, Issue 24883, 24 May 1946, Page 7

WORLD FEDERATION OF FARMERS

N.Z. Speakers Seek Freedom From State Influence

(Special Correspondent N.Z.PA.) (Rec. 11 p.m.) LONDON, May 23. On the grounds that the proposed constitution for the International Federation of Primary Producers did not sufficiently guarantee farmers’ freedom from Government control and restriction, the New Zealand delegation to the first international conference of agricultural producers introduced an amendment to the suggested constitution. The amendment was seconded by the leader of the Indian delegation, Professor N. Ranga, and sent to the constitution committee for consideration with the original proposals. Mr W. W. Mulholland, moving the amendment, said New Zealand farmers would strongly oppose any attempt to deal with world surpluses of primary produce by restricting production. He expressed the opinion that the proposed constitution did not explicitly exclude this possibility. Mr K. J. Holyoake, M.P., said the New Zealand primary producers’ organisations represented by the delegation would never agree to participate in any world body which would make then* subject to inter-Governmental control and restriction.

Mr Holyoake added that New Zealand farmers insisted upon freedom of action and considered that any world federation of primary producers vthich was established must remain completely outside Government domination. Mr Mulholland, moving the amendment, said New Zealand felt the proposed organisation, if- it adopted the suggested constitution, would be unduly subordinated to the Food and Agriculture Organisation. In their view, the federation should be an independent organisation representing the farmers’ viewpoint, and completely divorced from F.A.O. pr any other Government organisation. It should be free to assist or criticise, and, if necessary, "apply the boot to the trousers.” “Unless the producers of the world make their weight felt, F.A.O. will become an annual holiday resort for overworked Government officials,” added Mr Mulholland. “In the view of the New Zealand representatives, the chief objective of the federation must be to devise practical means of distributing world surpluses of primary produce without asking the producer to ‘carry the baby.’ “ ‘Maximum production’ must be the slogan of any international federation of agricultural producers,” said Mr Mulholland. Mr Mulholland suggested that the federation’s objects should be: — (1) To raise agriculture’s social and economic standards throughout the world. (2) To obtain the fullest possible use of agriculture’s potential capacity. (3) To accept a common responsibility withirt the producers of each community for any surplus. (4) To encourage and criticise governmental and inter-governmental action.

“I know that back in New Zealand they will not accept an organisation that merely assists and advises interGovernmental action,” said Mr Mulholland. “If we do not do something ourselves the politicians will, and speaking for myself I hate politicians—all of them.”

Mr Holyoake said he believed the farmers of the world would answer the desperate cry for more food, but he believed also that farmers were apprehensive lest their response should ultimately lead to the accumulation of surpluses which would depress world prices to the producers. If the farmer was to be asked to produce the maximum now he must be given an assurance of security during subsequent years. In order to do so he must plan now; but unfortunately the mere mention of the word “planning” was anathema to many farmers. Planning to them me?nt Government control of all kinds at home, and in the interna-

tional sphere quantitative restrictions for which they would have to pay the price. For this reason New Zealand felt that the proposed world federation'of farmers must be entirely outside Government control and the amendment was designed to lay stress on this. "We insist that farmers and their organisations shall have the maximum s say in handling their own affairs, right through from the fields to the markets.” Befcre»the New Zealand amendment was discussed the chairman (Mr James Turner) suggested that the proceedings would be shortened if it was referred to a committee for a report, but both Mr Mulholland and Mr Holyoake emphasised that they wished to explain their viewpoint to the conference before it was handed to a committee. The leader of the French delegation (M. A. Brousse) said France was entirely in accord with the New Zealand viewpoint. The proposed constitution v’as referred to a committee which will report to the plenary session next week. The New Zealand delegates were apSointed to the following committees: nance and staff, Mr Mulholland, Mr W. E. Hale< and Mr B. V. Cooksley; food and agriculture, Mr Cooksley, Mr G. H. Grigg, Mr A. B. Congdon, and Mr Holyoake; external relations and publicity, Mr Grigg and Mr Holyoake: constitution, Mr Hale and Mr Congdon.