MARKETING PLAN

Dominion, Volume 29, Issue 183, 1 May 1936, Page 12

MARKETING PLAN

“Policy of Idealists and Dreamers” OPPOSITION VIEW Debate on Government’s Proposals INFLUENCE ON BRITISH MARKET "This plan for marketing with a guaranteed price is the work of idealists and dreamers, and there is not a practical touch about it,” said bit Alfred Ransom (Opposition. Bahiahia) when the second-reading debate on the Primary Products Marketing Bill was resumed in the House of Representatives last night. He , would not doubt the sincerity of the Government, he said, but there was no attention to practical details or administration. “When the Minister of Finance was speaking last night 1 asked him to give details of the financial policy underlying the' scheme,” Sir- Alfred continued. “He touched on a few details, but the most important aspects he left severely alone.” Sir Alfred quoted from an election speech by the Prime Minister dealing witli debt-free credit. The Minister of Finance was more guarded. His speech the previous night was clever and well delivered, but was anything but practical. “But this Bill is an agricultural Bill,” Sir Alfred continued. “Why should a Minister of Finance who is a registered accountant bring the Dili before Parliament when we have a Minister of' Agriculture who is himself a farmer? Mr. Nash has also made a point regarding the co-operation he has received from members of the Executive Commission of Agriculture and the Dairy Board. All these people depend on the will of the Government. They have either to co-operate or get out.” ... “Complete Socialisation. Mr. Nash had said that no country had such resources as New Zealand, ignoring the fact that during late years Australia had far outstripped New Zealand in dairy production. The Government was running true to form in aiming at complete socialisation of the dairy industry, but it would take years before the Government or its new department had the experience of those controlling the old co-operative system of marketing. The Bill did not provide a guaranteed price but only a price fixed from year to year. The farmers themselves had been led to expect a guaranteed minimum, but they were to be disappointed. The last Government bad guaranteed both fruit and tobacco exports, but in those cases any amount realised in excess of the guarantees went to the producers. Under the scheme of the new Government for dairy produce the excess would go to the Government.

“This measure may easily sacrifice our goodwill on the London market,” Sir Alfred continued. “The overseas importers may easily look elsewhere for their supplies, and there are many sources available. The Government inay control producers, but it cannot dragoon Tooley Street. There will be jubilation among our competitors when they realise that the New Zealand producer has placed himself in a straight-jacket and is unable to move without the authority of tlie Minister of Marketing.”

The price was to be fixed on the average of the last eight to ten years, Sir Alfred said, and the averages for those years were as follow:—Butter: Eight years, 12.67 d.; nine years, 33.03<1.; ten years, 13.9 U. Olieese : Eight years, 13.62(1.; nine years, 13.88 d.; ten years, 14.47 d. It bad to be remembered that four of those years bad been under slump conditions, and the averages would not necessarily be more than the present world market rates. Under the Government’s various schemes, costs of production would also be increased, and that should be taken into consideration in fixing a price. Total Cost to State. On the basis of a present pay-out of lOd. and a guaranteed price of 1/2, the Government, would have to find a difference of 4d. per lb. The total cost to the Statd would be in the vicinity of £7,000,009 for the season. It had been stated that although the Labour Government was not a farmers’ Government it was doing more for the farmers than any farmers’ Government of the past. Tlie last Government had assisted the farmers to the extent of £13.683,000. Presumably the £7,000,000 under the guaranteed price would lie added to that and tlie farmers would receive £20,000.000. Government voices: Where did you get tlie money to give id the farmers? Sir Alfred: It came from the people, not from the clouds, and at the same time we reduced the indebtedness of the country. The Bill was a direct violation of the Ottawa Agreement, Sir Alfred continued. Tlie agreement provided that no Empire country should resort to a dumping bounty before 1937, but that was what the Government proposed to do. The-last Government had arranged for an open market in London for New Zealand dairy produce, but with the present scheme there might be an altered view at any moment, and the British Government might again raise the question of quotas with the prospect of ruin for New Zealand dairyfarmers. “I look to tlie future with grave anxiety,” Sir Alfred concluded. “I regard this legislation as a dangerous experiment revolutionary in character. In principle it is unsound, and it will probably end in disaster for those wlioin it is designed to protect.” -