RUSH DEPLORED

Evening Post, Volume CXVIII, Issue 101, 26 October 1934, Page 9

RUSH DEPLORED

DAIRY LEGISLATION

MEMBEES CRITICAL

INTRODUCTION OF BILL

PROTRACTED DEBATE

The Agriculture (Emergency Powers) Bill was introduced by Governor-General's Message in the House of Representatives last ovening, and met with a somewhat mixed reception. The Bill, which follows on the Dairy Commission's report, provides for revolutionary changes in the control of the dairy industry, and Opposition members criticised the measure, doubting whether it would give much needed and immediate relief to dairy farmers. Members from all sides of the House protested against the Bill being passed before representations from the industry could be heard, and the House divided on the Prime Minister's motion for urgency for the first reading. Urgency was accorded by 33 votes to 24, and there was a three hours' discussion before the first reading was agreed to. Information as to the procedure to be adopted by tho Government in the passage of the legislation was sought by tho Leader of the Opposition (Mr. M. J. Savage), who asked the Minister of Agriculture whether lie would give those affected an opportunity of being hoard before the1 legislation was passed.' "Is it tho intention of the Minister to sledge-hammer this thing through, whether it is wanted or not by those affected?" asked Mr. Savage. Mr. A. M. Samuel (Independent, Thames) said that ho felt some apprehension on behalf of tho primary producers. If a first reading were accorded, he feared that at tho next sitting the Bill would be rushed througli. It was a measure that was going to have a tremendous effect on tho dairy industry, and never before in the history of tho country had any industry been changed without that industry having an opportunity of considering tl: proposals concerning its future. It was proposed that the board to be established should not only supersodo all other boards, but should bo absolutely above tho Minister. There was to be absolute control, and he wanted to know from tho Minister ■what tho board war to cost annually. It seemed that it was to cost more than any other Department. Was the moasuro to oe slogged, willy-nilly, through the House? He did not objoct to it going through if it was going to bo in tho interests of tho primary producers, but the producers should havo an opportunity of scrutinising any legislation that was going to affect their operations. He doubted whether the industry would receive anything but an army of inspectors and harassing regulations. The industry would not get tho assistanco it was screaming out for today. Did the Bill hold out any hope for the dairy farmer? The Prime Minister (tho Rt. Hon. G. W. Forbes) said that it had never been tho practice of tho Government to "slog" Bills through tho House., Members: Oh! Oh! Mr. B. Scruple (Labour, Wellington East): No Government applied the closure till you camo on tho scene. Mr. Forbes said that it was necessary that something should bo done to improve tho marketing position in the United Kingdom and in other markets. The member for Stratford (Mr. W. J. Poison) had said that New Zealand had the world's worst marketing methods. Tho position toda/ was desperate, and if the Government did not pass a Billj it would bo condemned from one end of tho country to the other, and it was the intention of the Government to put the measure on the Btatuto Book. It was an empowering Bill, and the machinery would operate by Order in Council. Mr. W. J, Jordan (Labour, Manukau): This year? Mr. Forbes: Very likely; I don't think the situation brooks delay. Mr. W. E. Parry (Labour, Auckland Central): Will this cure tho evilf The question of the marketing of produce was important, continued Mr. Forbes, and though the country was producing lino produce, it was being exploited on a glutted market. Mr. Scmple: Have you just discovered that? Mr. Forbes: JS row, what is the Government doing to clear it up • "Nothing," replied Mr. Parry. Mr. Forbes said that it was necessary that an outlet should be found for the Dominion's produce. The House would have an opportunity of discussing the Bill on Tuesday, or perhaps Monday. Ho pointed out that the report of the Dairy Commission had been circulated, and the recommendations had been made known throughout the country. With certain uiocli(ications, the Bill gave effect to the recommendations. DISCUSSION OF REPORT. Tho Leader of the Opposition: Will t lie Prime Minister make it possible /'or the Dairy Commission's report to 1,0 discussed at the same time-that the Hill is discussed? The Prime Minister said that arrangements could bo niiido to that effect. Mr. J. A. Leo (Labour, Gray Lynn) said that the dairy industry had been in distress for six years, and now that it was coming up for the last time, the Government said, "For God's sake let us givo it a lesson so that it can swim. Last night caucus said, 'We must pass something.''' ilu said | that the Minister of Finance, abovo allj others, had marred flu; efforts for "rderly marketing. The Minister of Fiiiiiiico (Ihe Rt. j Hon. J. G. Coiiioti): Why blame thu i innocent Minister of Finance? j Mr. Leo: The Go\'crnmcnt cannot attack, but it known how to retreat. Mr. C. A. Wilkinson (Independent, Kgmont) said that, something had to be done, and it was expected that the Government would do it. After all, the dairy farmer's trouble contred round the question of finance, ho having bought his land at fnr too high a price. Today, the advance on butterfat was C}d a pound, and last year tho advance wns l(Ud. If there was a crisis last year, then what was the position now? If i were possible for the farmers to make representations, he hoped it would bo done. Mr. W. .T. Poison (Government, Stratford) said ho hoped that the dairy industry was not going to be turned into a political chopping-block, and ho hoped that both aides of the Houso would realise that the position of the industry waa a shocking one A large proportion of tho dairy farmers were bankrupt, nnil only about 7 per cent, wore making the industry pay. It sremed that tlio legislation was like locking the stable door after ilie horse hud got out "Tho eniv, this lime." iiilerji.-fHer) Mr. A. i. rttalhvrirthy (7ndepeiident. Ivlcn). "LACK OF COURAGE." Mr. Poison said tlmr mavkeling uiirt organisation proposals were valuable, I bill wlint Ihe dairy .f.-irnn'r needed to-

day wns urgent, and immediate rolifil'. That relief could bo given if the Government had tho courage to tackle the ; problem. "I regret that the Govcrnj ment has not had the courage," ho said. i Tho Chairman of Committees (Mr. IS. JG. Smith): Order! i Mr. P. Frasor (Labour, Wellington j Central): The enterprise? j Mr. Poison: The vision and cuter- i prise. I Ho aid that from tho north and south j of Now Zealand ho had received re- j quests that tho legislation should not j be passed till it had been inquired into. Tho Farmers' Union had asked that it bo delayed. ' Mr. Coates: Every protest, has beeu j inspired. i Mr. Poison: I can show tho Minister j a telegram iv which the request; is made unanimously. Mr. Coates: Who were unanimous? Mr. Poison: Tho executive of the | Otugo Farmers' Union. j Mr. D. McDougall (Independent, ■ Mataura): And tho dairy men of South- j land. j Air. Coates: We don't legislato by! telegrams. , j Mr. Poison: I don't know how the j honourablo gentleman legislates. j He said that tho proposals mado were valuable,.but there was something morel valuable that had been neglected.Mr. H. G. Dickie (Government, Patea) said that he hoped that the Bill would not be rushed, as it was possible! to get the opinion of the industry very , quickly. Those criticising marketing; probably knew very little about it. j A member: Does that apply to tho j Prime Minister? Mr. Dickie: I am speaking in general terms. Mr. P. Fraser (Labour, Wellington Central) said that he hoped that the Government would not try to drive the i legislation through at all costs. The j Dairy Board had been hamstrung in j London by tho Minister of Finance, Mr. i Stronach Patcrson, and others, and there had been a, betrayal of the industry. I Was there to be any remedy in the Bill? How would marketing proposals overcome the quota'? What would tho new board do that tho old board could not do? Were there to be guaranteed prices? As far as the Opposition was t concerned if there was a crumb of legislation that would benefit the dairy farmers and the country it would be supported wholeheartedly. Did the Bill make provision for any reciprocal agreements in''regard to marketing? j NECESSITY FOR ACTION. , The Minister of Agriculture (the Hon. 0. E. Macmillan) said that as far as tho Executive Commission of Agriculture was concerned it had been known all along that some organisation with larger powers than thoso possessed by tho control boards wan necessary. Somebody had to make reciprocal trade | agreements, and it was impossible for | Ministers to loavc New Zealand in suffi-1 ciently largo numbers. i Mr. H. T. Armstrong (Labour, Christchurch East): It would be a good thing for tho country if they did. The Minister said that it was almost impossible for a private individual to make connections outside tho Empire, as foreign countries imposed restrictions, Thero had to bo something higher than tho private traders, and there had to be governmental -action and treaty. The Minister instanced cases—America and Belgium—where arrangements were made for tho taking of New Zealand produce but where those arrangements were not availed of because the private trader would not take tho risk of the new markets, Further, there was nobody to say that the producer should export there. Mr. Samuel: Does that apply to butterfat? Tho Minister: To everything. Mr. Samuel: Is it going to help tho butter industry? The Minister said that the dairy farmer was not receiving world's parity in prices. Butter was being sold in Franco for 2s Gd a pound, and the time was long past when the country should take steps to make contact with those countries. Mr. Samuel: Have, we not tried it already? Tho Minister: There has been no possibility of trying it. The Minister stressed the necessity, also, for co-opera-tion between tho Meat and Dairy Boards in tho marketing of certain byproducts of the dairy industry. Tho more tho Government was interested financially in tho industry, the bigger say they should havo in it. The measure did not givo tho immediate relief asked for, but it would help the farmers to get out of their difficulties. Other proposals woro to be submitted. Mr. Samuel asked the Minister whether the industry would have tho opportunity of scrutinising thu legislation, ' REQUEST OF CONFERENCE. The Minister said that thero was no use in waking up at the eleventh hour fifty-ninth minute. A conference had > been held in Wellington in June, and the guaranteed price proposal had been turned down. Mr. Poison said that they had asked for a subsidy. The Minister said that the confer- j once had asked for the Dairy Commis-1 sion to bo set up. As much as he would | like tho indutry to have tho opportun-1 ity members had naked for it would! take tho Houso all its time, to have the j legislation iv working order by next session. ' Mr. H. T. Armstrong (Labour, Christchurch East) said he did not think tho substitution of one board for another would got the farmer out of his difficulties. Mr. Coates said it was true, that strnie parts of New Zealand woro opposed to tho Bill, but others wore in favour of it. lie had received many telegrams supporting it. What Parliament had to decido was whether tho provisions of the Bill were in the interests of tho country and the dairy industry or not. It was not tho intention of the Government to hurry tho thing through, as a measure of that importance warranted considerable consideration by thoso concerned, but a crisis had been reached, and they had to decide what was tho best from tho immediate point of view; but they must not forget tho Jong view. " J I The Minister of Agriculture, in roply,; '■said tlmt ho hail received a. message] from tin organisation, representing I twelve thousand suppliers, favouring ! i the, proposals. I

After three hours' discussion (.he. Bill was read a first time on the voices.

The provisions of this Bill are set out on page 4.