The Press SATURDAY, JUNE 4, 1960. Farmers And Industrial Development

Press, Volume XCIX, Issue 29222, 4 June 1960, Page 12

The Press SATURDAY, JUNE 4, 1960. Farmers And Industrial Development

The sensitiveness to a coming event shown in the current

season of farmers’ conferences was reflected at the annual meeting of the North Canterbury district of Federated Farmers. The week after next an industrial development conference sponsored by the Minister of Industries and Commerce (Mr Holloway) will be held in Wellington. What may well be representative views of the farming community about this conference were expressed to the North Canterbury farmers by the vice-president of Federated Farmers, Mr W. Malcolm, when he said that “in the “ tumult and the shouting the “ voice and warnings of farming “ will go unheeded. New Zea- “ land must march on to its “ great industrial future, irre- “ spective of effects on the “export industries”. It would be wrong, of course, to think that opinions from the farming will not be put forward with ability and force at the industrial development conference. That would be a poor compliment to the secretary of Federated Farmers (Mr A. P. O’Shea), who will be one of the opening speakers, and to Mr E. J. Fawcett (formerly DirectorGeneral of Agriculture), who will read a paper. Whether their voices will be heeded, or especially noticed, in an atmosphere of enthusiasm for industrial development is another matter; the farming community may have reason for its fears.

Farmers are not opposed to industrial development; they realise that a large part of an increasing population must find its employment in secondary industries and in services. What

they do fear is the development of industries that would saddle farming with costs that jeopardise the prospects of New Zealand primary products on world markets. The president of the North Canterbury district, Mr J. F. E. Blakely, gave an example of such extra costs when he showed that the sheep industry pays £262,500 more for woolpacks than if all its requirements were imported from Pakistan and India. The dairy industry has a similar complaint about butter cartons. The Government’s import restrictions on woollen goods are an example of misguided policy. To protect New Zealand woollen mills the Government shut goods from British mills out of the New Zealand market. The New Zealand mills could not replace many of these goods; but cotton and rayon mills could. Consequently, the net result of the Government’s policy was that the use of New Zealand wool fell. When he was guest speaker at the annual farmers’ conference at Lincoln College recently, Mr O’Shea gave a list of subjects that he believed could profitably be discussed generally. He questioned a widespread attitude of complacency towards farming and the belief that it could carry any weight of costs and still expand and still earn overseas funds to support secondary industries and services. If the 400 delegates representing some 100 organisations at the industrial development conference do not allow themselves to forget that a country with limited indigenous raw materials depends heavily on its soil they may be able to keep their deliberations within practical bounds.