FARMERS’ PLAN

Dominion, Volume 31, Issue 204, 26 May 1938, Page 12

FARMERS’ PLAN

Fixing The Guaranteed

Price

CONFERENCE’S DESIRE

An Independent Tribunal

Favoured

COMPENSATORY SCHEME

The procedure it desires to be followed in computing the price of dairy produce while the guaranteed price is in operation was determined by the annual interprovincial conference of the New Zealand Farmers’ Union at Wellington yesterday.

The consideration of this question was opened on Tuesday following the announcement by the Prime Minister, Rt. Hon. M. J, Savage, that, if the- dairy-farmers desired it, the Government was prepared to set up ap independent tribunal to fix the price each season. Discussion was then adjourned to enable a further remit on the subject to be framed. „ „ At yesterday’s sitting the following remit was carried unanimously:— “That in computing the price of dairy produce while the guaranteed price is in operation an independent tribunal should be set up, presided over by a Supreme Court judge. “That the personnel should be mutually agreed upon by a committee consisting of equal numbers of members nominated by the dairy industry as sellers and the ■Government as buyers. “That the "price should be determined by the tribunal from the evidence placed before it, and that the proceedings and findings of the tribunal be ma'de public. “The price to be such as will: “(a) Enable farmers to pay com- ! petitive rates for wages.

“(b) Allow them reasonable interest On the capital invested in their farms and stock. “(c) Enable them to meet the increased costs imposed by legislation, including tariffs. “(d) Allow them a remunera-

tion commensurate 'with the service they render, and with that obtained by other members of the community who render equal service.”

The adoption of the remit was moved by Mr. A. Ross (Masterton) who'said that it would enable a discussion to take place on the guaranteed price, the compensatory price and other related matters.

Mr. H. Bennett (Masterton) seconded the motion.

The Compensatory Price.

A leading exponent of the compensatory price scheme, Mr. J. H. Eurniss, who is an Auckland member of the Dominion executive of the union, was invited to address the conference. Mr. Eurniss said the compensatory price advocates had been charged with putting forward a claim without any solution of the problem. The farmers did maintain that as they did not get the country into the mess it was in it was not up to them to get it out of it. However, they were prepared not only to show the injury they were suffering but also to show the wAy out of it.

An attempt had been made to divide the dairy-farmers and the sheep-far-mers on this question, he said. The scheme was being put forward on behalf of all primary producers. They were endeavouring to build a bombproof shelter which would be available to all primary producers if and when they wanted it. “We tolerate the guaranteed price to-day because we are unable to do anything else,’’ Mr. Furniss continued. “We reject the guaranteed price entirely and demand the compensatory' price as the only satisfactory alternative.”

The first step necessary in introducing the compensatory price would be to set up a statistical authority to calculate the disability; under which the primary producers,‘were suffering. This disability had been calculated in other countries. They demanded that it be done in New Zealand. Unless it was done they could not get a basis from ■which to build.

Impartial Chairman.

The next point to go into would be the setting up of a tribunal —assuming that costs could not be brought down—the findings of which would have the same applicability as those of the Arbitration Court. The chairman must be acceptable to both parties and be impartial. The tribunal would apply the findings of the statistical authority. ‘■There is no hope for the farming community except along those lines, absolutely none,” Mr. Furniss said. “You will suffer a reclining standard of reward for your services, forced upon you by increasing costs and economic nationalism. That is definitely coming. But the compensatory price will arrest that business once and for all, and give us what we earn and nothing more. We want all that we are entitled to, and not a penny more, but not as dictated by Mr. Nash or anybody else.” Failing that, lie said, ,the farmers might be forced to adopt the tactics of others and strike. That would involve grave consequences, with the possibility of civil war. “This is the fight of New Zealand,” Mr. Furniss said in appealing for support for the compensatory price campaign. "We are now the aggressors and the Government is on the defensive, and I suggest that that is due to the fight we have put up on the compensatory price. We..are in the position of getting to the last round of the fight.” Sheep Farmers’ Bill. Mr. W. J. Thomas (Carterton) said it was a general opinion that the compensating price movement was designed to assist dairy farmers and that it would add to the bill of the sheep farin er. • t “There is no foundation for that,’ Mr. Furniss replied. “We are fighting on behalf of all the exporting primary producers. Sooner or later we will all ■be in the same squeeze—inflated internal costs. If the wool growers feel that they do not need to come into a .system of that nature, it is still important that they should see that system in operation so that it will be there when the squeeze begins to operate.”

/ Mr. A. J. Denney (Greytown) asked ■whether the present marketing system j would be used in conjunction with the compensatory price and also whether the ordinary fluctuations of the market

would be accentuated under that price.

Mr. Eurniss said there was no connection between the compensatory price and Government control of marketing, which was not accepted- Centralised control, which was desirable, did not necessarily mean Government control, but control, by the producers’ own elected boards. Fluctuation in prices was inevitable, but did not necessarily mean fluctuation in the return the farmers got, which was in goods - So far as the guaranteed price went, there was no security and no stability, Mr. Furniss added. If there was a big- drop in the price in London tomorrow the guaranteed price could be brought down on all produce which had not passed under the control of the Government. The amending legislation had been put through to enable the price to be dropped if prices fell abroad. Election Year. Mr. C. Smith (Wanganui) : If the price in London dropped to-day, would the guaranteed price be lowered? Mr. Furniss: If it was not election year I would say “yes.”' Replying to the suggestion by another delegate that in adopting the compensating price the farmers would be throwing away the substance for the shadow, Mr. Furniss said New Zealand would only be following what other nations had done.

Mr. L. T. Daniell (Masterton) : Will the sheep-farmer benefit from the compensating price unless he takes a fixed price? Mr. Furniss : The compensatory price is not a fixed price in that sense. It is a price adjusted to external fluctuations.

MivM. J. McLeavey (Manawatu) asked whether, if the farmers were placed in a position to offer men £6 a week on the farms, .would they get them. The rising generation did not look on money as people used to. Mr. Furniss: If we are going to expect a general shortening of hours all round, then the only thing we cam do in the dairy industry is to work on shifts. Mr. Nash has not yet evolved a 40-hour-week cow or a 30-hour-week cow. We have to get the gash in the first place since we cannot get a 30hour cdw. The chairman, Mr. J. Livingston, said if this question was to be gone into properly it would take more than a day. “The motion before you will not in any way do you any harm,” he said. "The question has been before the Dominion executive. It will look after the interests of the farmers.” “Very Fair Proposition.” Mr. Thomas said if the resolution was intended to deal with the guaranteed price they should make it clear that they were asking for the tribunal for that purpose and for so long as the guaranteed price was in operation. This wag agreed to. Mr. Daniell: The sheep-farmers are vitally interested in this. They hold that it is impossible to subsidise the main primary industry —the pastoral industry. To-day the discussion Jias ended largely in shadow-sparring. The sheep-farmer may have to pay. The Dominion president, Mr. W. W. Mulholland, said he was rather disturbed at the evidence of cleavage be tween sheep-farmers and dairy-farmers on this matter. The remit dealt witii the position as it existed to-day. It was every farmer’s duty to see that the dairy-farmers got tr fair deal. The sheep-farmers were in just as bad a position on the long-range view as the dairy-farmers. They could not afford to look at this matter from a .sectional point of view. “It is a very fair pro position at the moment,” Mr. Mulholland said. A delegate: It. is a blank cheque. Mr. Mulholland: I will ask flic sheepfarmers to support a proposition widen asks for justice for everybody.