TOMATO GROWING

Evening Post, Volume CXVI, Issue 113, 9 November 1933, Page 9

TOMATO GROWING

REGISTRATION BILL

MEMBERS CRITICAL

DEBATE IN HOUSE

'Tlie Tomato Gardens Begistration Bill did not meet with an entirely cordial reception in the second reading debate in' the House of Representatives last evening, and some members were inclined to be mildly satirical about its provisions, but the' Bill did not altogether lack support. The debate was interrupted by the rising of the Hous» at 10.30 p.m. In moving the second- reading tha Minister of Agriculture (the Hon. C. E. Macmillan) said that the Bill had been asked for for a number of years. It was designed to foster the development of tomatoes for commercial purposes, and the House would be pleased to know that it was not the intention of the Government to set up another board. The Bill provided for, the re* ' gistration of tomato gardens in, which' there were more than 250 plants, and all moneys received from registration fees-would be paid into the1 Consolidated Fund to the credit of a deposit account after the expenses of administration and collection had been deducted. The residue of the registration fees would bD paid to the Dominion Council of Tomato, ,Soft Fruit, ana Produca Growers, to be expended lor such purposes in furtherance of the interests of the tomato growers as the Minister might approve. Mr. Macmillan said . that he had received, no objections to the Bill. , ' "PATCHWORK BILLS." "I don't want to raise any serious objection to this Bill," said Mr. W.. E. Parry (Labour, Auckland Central),, "but I wonder when we are going to <ret the last of these patchwork Bills. We will have one dealing with the potato growers next, and why shouldn t there be one for cabbages, and every, other kind of vegetable? H He said that the Bill raised the question as. u> whether the Minister of Agriculture was carrying out his duties to tlw , C°Mr. A. J. Stallworthy (Independent - t - Eden): Delegation of authority. Mr. Parry- said that the Bill would not create order out of chaoe. At the present time the market for tomatoes was periodically glutted, and when, this happened, the growers generally; turned over to some other kind of produce, which, in its turn, was produced in surplus. What was needed was some kind of plan which would give the people order instead of chaos. It was no time to place Bills like the present measure before the House. Tha House should be occupied in dealing with much more serious measures. Some-* ihing should be done to solve the difficulties that all produce growers were faced with. There was an imperative need for the intelligent direction of production in order to prevent over- • production of commodities. Mr. B. A. Wright (Government, Wellington Suburbs) said that he could not agree that tomatoes were always cheap. Sometimes in Wellington they were too , dear for the big majority of people, while at others they could be bought for as low as one shilling a case. It. was a difficult matter, however, to control tomato growers or farmers of any, kind. The Bill stipulated that all growers having over 250 plants were, required to register, and he thought that this provision would be difficult to administer without an army of inspectors. ' Mr. A. M. Samuel (Government, Thames): Thai inspectors could b» armed with sprays to deal with th« white butterfly. (Laughter.) Mr. Wright-said that no doubt,* number of the unemployed would mak« admirable inspectors. TO IMPROVE INDUSTRY. . Mrs. E. E. McCombs (Labour, Lyti telton) expressed the hope that th» Minister would send the Bill to a Select Committee. She knew that tomato growers had been agitating for years for legislation which would give them power to improve their industry, which was having a trying time. She did not know of any objections to the Bill. Mr. C. H. Clinkard (Government,' Botorua) said that the Bill would enable the growers to exercise greater co« operation, and thus ensure-more orderly marketing. Mr. J. O'Brien (Labour, Westland) said, that the Minister of Agriculture was putting up a steam hammer witK which to crack a nut, and the whole thing was an interference with the, tomato growers. The tomato growers did not know what they had let themselves in for. Mr. H. Atmore (Independent, Nelson) said some organisation was desired, and if the growers had asked for some protection they were entitled to it. He thought that the fees were too high, but that matter couldf be considered later. If it were desired to help the growers, i;he Minister should stop lata shipments from the Cook Islands. Mr. F. Jones (Labour, Dunedjn South) said he would like to hear some ; very good reasons before ho would vote for the Bill. Mr. W. H. Field (Government, Otaki) said the growers were anxious to improve their position, and had asked for the legislation. He was entirely behind the Bill.

Mr. W. E. Barnard (Labour, Napier) asked whether the Government had something big in mind to cover all industry. Would there be a Bill to cover the exit flower industry! Mr. A. S. Eiehards (Labour, Hoskill)] said that the Government would be up> against a stone wall. A member: A tomato wall. The Bill was too* stupid for words, said Mr. Eiehards.

The debate was adjourned.