Tractor Safety

Press, Volume CIII, Issue 30530, 27 August 1964, Page 12

Tractor Safety

The North Canterbury provincial executive of Federated Farmers wishes to “ correct the impression “ given in * The Press ’ leading article of July 22 “ that Federated Farmers are against tractor safety “ cabs, whereas at present they are against com- “ pulsion only ”. They have nothing to “ correct ”, since the passage in our leading article read: “ The “ Government has approached the question hesitantly, “ because the compulsory equipment of tractors with “ safety devices has been opposed by Federated Far- “ mers (though not by Young Farmers’ Clubs). The “ reason for the objection is not clear beyond the “natural instinct of farmers to oppose further re- “ strictions ...” There was nothing to suggest that farmers had any view different from the one they have repeated now, although some of the delegates at this week’s meeting of the executive evidently are “ against safety cabs ” as well as ■“ against com- “ pulsion ”,

Two comments may be added. First, “The “ Press ” has never limited its advocacy of tractor safety devices to cabs, because some other, protective measures may be preferable for some kinds of tractors and some kinds of work. Second, we would not be “ for compulsion ” until some appropriate authority was satisfied that protective’ devices would really protect What “The Press” is “against” is any delay in devising or adopting measures to check the appalling and unnecessary waste of life in farmtractor accidents. . '