FURTHER POINTS IN DEBATE

Evening Star, Issue 22326, 30 April 1936, Page 5

FURTHER POINTS IN DEBATE

DETAILS OF IHTEHTIOHS [Per United Press Association.] WELLINGTON, April 29. When the House resumed at 7.30 p.m. the Hon. W. Nash moved the second reading of the Primary Products Alarketing Bill. He said he would like to thank those who had helped him in framing the measure, particularly his own staff, the Alinister of Agriculture, and the members of the Dairy Board. Whilst it was a primary products marketing Bill, and was linked with guaranteed prices, it had' some association with the finances, ’and unless it had some connection with other sections of the community than the farmers they would have failed to reach the goal they had set out to achieve. He quoted figures to show that the people had not had made available to them the things they would have had had the Dominion had a proper scheme of marketing distribution. He quoted the price for blitter fat over a number of years and showed that in 1904-05 it was 9]d a lb; in 1913-14 12d; in 1920-21. 33d; in 1930-31, 12id; in 1934-35, 8.94 d. Between 1911-21 production increased threefold, while prices lifted seven and a-half times. Land values in the same period increased by 133 million. Between 1921-31 production more than doubled, and last year, while there was three times the production compared with 1921, prices were much less. Was it possible to continue to produce that commodity with any_ certainty _ that the farmers were going to receive a reasonable standard of living out of their work with that variation going on ? He appealed for the co-operation of all, and said that if land values were going to improve as the result of the activities of the Government, then that improvement must go to the people, not to the speculator. A member of the British House of Commons suggested the setting np of a War Food Board to ensure that the people of Britain would receive sufficient food during a war, but why wait for a war? Why not do it now, when so many people were not receiving sufficient food? There was no country with suck resources as New Zealand. The diffienltv was to find a market for them. He 'did not believe that the spending of a lot of money would solve the problem. He believed that human needs would he ineffective to create demand if they were not backed by income, which must depend on someone’s production.

Air Nash said New Zealand must he responsible for some time for the production of raw materials, and they must see that the farmer received adequate remuneration for his labour. That was what the Bill set out to do, and he knew there was no better way of doing it than to purchase the farmer’s commodity from him. He held that there was too much of the wealth of New Zealand and other countries going to the people who found the money. Alore of it should go to those who did the work.

He proceeded to deal with the various clauses of the Bill and the procedure to be adopted in paying the farmer. He said that as soon as the goods were aboard a vessel the farmer would be paid from the dairy industry account in the Reserve Bank. If there was a surplus in the account nothing would be taken from it to make up a deficiency in any other account. A report would be presented to Parliament covering the production ’-ear in full detail. Farmers would receive full information to enable them to understand what the Government was doing. The Bill would apply to butter and cheese only, and to other commodities when the Alinister so decided. The dairy industry would be informed of the price to he paid as soon as it would he too late for anything to he done to the detriment of the industry. An endeavour would he made to give the farmer what he was entitled to, and what he never had, even from the farmers’ Government. He hoped the farmer's wife would not have to work except to look after the children; but if she did she .would be paid. Land costs, which also had something to do with the costs of production, would received consideration in fixing the price to be paid.

There had been statements. Mr Nash added, that Tooley Street would fight the Government in what it proposed to do, but Tooley Street had given nothing but co-operation, and Tooley Street had said something on the lines proposed in the Bill should be done. The Government would see that the houses in Tooley Street handling the New Zealand produce would receive adequate commission for the work they did. The Government’s aim would be to encourage the farmer to produce the highest possible quality, and the number of grades would he fixed so that the farmer would be remunerated for the labour he put into improving his produce. Tie doubted if any section of the community had had greater worries than the dairy farmers. Many of them had seen their lifetime savings go overboard. The Government was trying to build a national economy that would give individuals what thev were entitled to. He told the people of the Old Country, when New Zealand had provided her own people with a living, that

they were entitled to come over and live" in New Zealand. There was plenty for all in this country. Mr Coates said he wished to digress for a moment, and took the opportunity of congratulating the Prime Minister on being appointed to the Privy Council. (Applause.) FIRST ATTACK, Mr Coates said the Bill had been introduced under the title of the Primary Products Marketing IV!. Actually the Minister of Finance would have been well advised to pay more attention to alliteration and call the Bill the Primary Products Pirating Bill. The implications of the measure were such that it would mean political piracy on a stupendous scale. The proposals in the Bill were not the proposals put before the electors last year. The Minister did not disclose anything nearly as drastic as the provisions tor bulk State purchase revealed in the Bill. The Labour Party might have received a mandate to pay a guaranteed price for dairy produce, but it certainly did not receive a mandate to take" over the whole of the country's produce at a price which it could fix for itself. Some countries were guaranteeing returns to producers, but the general aim was to encourage production of the goods needed for home consumption, not for export. That was a vastly different matter. As far as the dairy industry was concerned the Bill was providing absolutely for socialisation of production, distribution, and exchange. The ultimate aim was bulk purchase and bulk barter, but the Government would not come into the open and say so. Ihe proposal to fix prices was only the thin edge of the wedge, but there was a heavy maul behind it. Mr Coates said the Government’s activities could not be isolated to primary products. Sooner or later all industry would be brought under the same manipulation. A suggestion of that kind had already been made by Mr Sullivan in his plan for licensing industry. After that there would be only a short step to complete socialisation. He declared that the Government’s intentions were being carefully masked, and alleged that its goal was straight out Socialism. The taking over of the ownership and control of dairy produce, Mr Coates added, meant that insurmountable barriers were being placed in the wav of individual effort, tenacity, and enterprise. The importance of exports was being entirely overlooked. The present receipts from that source were about 45 to 50 million a year, and nothing should be done which might interfere with that source. Another important point was that internal prices closely followed export prices. The Government’s suggestion that an extension of the secondary industries would mean less dependence on primary production was fallacious from the start. New Zealand, with a population of 1,500.000, could not hope to use mass production methods for the local market, and that would have a marked bearing on costs. Let ns by all means encourage industrial production in the Dominion, said Mr Coates, but let us not forget that we are largely dependent on the goodwill of _ those countries overseas which are willing to buy from us those goods which we have a natural genius for producing. Mr Coates urged the farmers to keep the future in their own hands, and meet the world markets. He, personally, and every member on that side of the House would oppose every inch of the road to socialise the industries of this country'. MIGHT GIVE LEAD TO WORLD. Mr Atmore said that if the Government solved the problem it would be giving a lead to the world, as New Zealand gave 30 years ago. New Zealand was the wealthiest country per capita in the world, yet they had poverty. He contended that the fanner to-dav was not handling his own goods. The 'farmer to-day was the tenant at will of the mortgagee. There was no shortage of produce in New Zealand, vet the people could not get access to it. He thought international trade would decline.'New Zealand was going to manufacture more of her requirements, which meant she would obtain less from Britain, who in turn would take less of the Dominion’s primary produce. ALL ELSE TRIED. Mr Savage returned thanks for the congratulations offered him and the generous references made to him. He regretted that Mr Coates warned the farmers not to accept the Bill if it became the law of the land. He would 1 take back none of the reassuring statements he had made to the country and would make them again. Air Coates seemed to forget that the details of the Bill dealt with general principles. The Government only came into the field when other means had failed, and the system adopted when Mr Coates and his party governed had failed, and they had to find something to take its place. Air Coates said the Government had no mandate from the people. He (Air Savage) must be a pretty poor judge. The Government had 55 members in the House out of a possible of 80. That seemed a substantial argument. , The Government would exercise wisdom and care. It had a great responsibility placed upon its shoulders, and accepted it will all humility, hut without fear. If his statements had a reassuring effect on the people of the country he had achieved the object he had set out to reach. Ali; Savage said the mortgagees’ equity to-day rested on 87s a cwt. When the Bill went into force it would be resting on considerably more than that, vet Air Coates talked of Bed Socialism. It seemed common sense to him, and he did not care what colour it was. He thought everybody was entitled to an equitable share of the produce of the Dominion, and that vvas what the Bill set out to do. The Government wanted to increase production. but unless they increased the farmers’ income it would be waste of time increasing production. Air Coates spoke on bulk barter. They had got. past the days of barter, but it was just ar, well to deal with such things when they were raised as a bogey to scare the people. Air Savage said the Government wanted to give a man some inducement to work, and after August 1 the farmer would know what he was working for. He advised the average farmer to stick to his farm, as the Government was out to help the man on the land. Air Savage again referred to Air Coates’s advice to farmers not to accept the provisions of the Bill when it became law, as it must do. That was the same as teding them not to obey the law.

Opposition Voices; No, no. Mr Savage; “ What else can it mean?” It was a responsibility he was not willing to accept. The Government was not going to do anything that was likely to be to the farmers’ disadvantage.

The debate was adjourned and the House rose at 10.30 p.m.

A BIG EXPERIMENT SUCCESS MIGHT ALTER WORLD ECONOMICS PREMIER MEETS DAIRY REPRESENTATIVES [Per United Press Association.] WELLINGTON, April 29. The Dominion conference of ward delegates of the dairy industry was opened to-day and was attended by the Minister of Finance (the Hon. IV. Nash), who explained the purposes of the Primary Products Marketing Bill. Mr Nash said there was no suggestion that the Bill could not be altered. The Government wanted the help and cooperation of the industry to make it more perfect. He did not think he could shift on the principle of the Bill, but if delegates could make suggestions that would help to make the procedure simpler, amendments necessary to put those suggestions into effect would lie introduced during the committee stages in the House. A delegate; What’s the price going to be P

Air Nash: Ah, that’s another matter,

All sorts of work had been done, said the Alinister, to determine what should lie paid. The Bill provided that different prices could be paid for different kinds of dairy produce or different grades of dairy produce. The Prime Alinister had promised during the election campaign that the price for the first year would be based on the average price over an eight to 10-year period. He would discuss that period, but would not discuss the price.

Replying to int-erjectors, Mr Nash said he would uot have the slightest qualms about telling delegates what the price was to be jf he thought it was in the interests of the industry. The principle the Government was working on was to put all its cards on the table all the time unless there were potential agencies at work that might put snags in the way and cause the Government’s work to break down and not be effective. All we ask of you,” added Mr Nash, “ is to give us the same trust as we are putting in you. That is the reason why wo haven’t discussed the price, but I shall discuss what that means to-morrow.”

Mr Nash said the aim of the Government was to use the market for dairy produce of the Dominion in such a way as to give a return to the dairy farmer

that he had not had for a long time. If the Government was successful in this it would make a very great difference in world economics, as well as New Zealand economics. After the first production year the price was to be fixed according to the conditions governing the industry, but in any case the price must be such that it would provide a reasonable standard of living for the producer. Power was given to deal with any person or organisation that attempted to prevent the producer from getting a just reward for his labours. The Minister of Agriculture (the Hon. W. I-iee Martin) said the Bill had been carefully considered and the Government believed it would remove the insecurity of recent years. It wat a tremendous experiment in many ways, but they believed it would succeed and Ire the forerunner of further measures for stabilising the position of the man on the land. Further than that, they believed the action they had taken would lead to something that would be copied in other countries. He appealed to those engaged in the dairy industry to co-operate with the Government in its endeavour to place every working farmer in a. position of stability.

After the Ministers had left, the conference went into committee to discus details of the Bill.