FARMERS’ POPULATION VIEW

Evening Star, Issue 25782, 3 May 1946, Page 6

FARMERS’ POPULATION VIEW

OUR LIMITED NATURAL RESOURCES EXPLOITATION OF POORER LANDS ESSENTIAL (P.A.) WELLINGTON, May 2. “ There is no'easy and quick method of expanding the population of, the Dominion and at the same time successfully absorbing newcomers into payable occupations,” was the first of a series of propositions presented to the Parliamentary Committee on Population to-day by Mr A. P. O’Shea on behalf of tliq New Zealand Farmers’ Union and the'Federated Farmers. Other propositions were: “The population of a country must be in proportion to its natural resources and also to its proximity to markets. In minerals New Zealand is one of the poorest countries in the world and of all exporting countries is the most distant from its markets; since the population of a country depends on production, and since production is determined by costs, it is vitally necessary'for New Zealand to keep her costs down to the lowest possible level; New Zealand is vitally dependent on production from her poorer land, and costs are already endangering production from that land; the wise method of increasing the population is to make it possible for the population to be absorbed by or through the poorer land in the Dominion; this is possible_only if the town dwellers of the Dominion will play their part in reducing costs; if there is to be limited immigration, people prepared to go on land would be the most suitable immigrants, but these cannot be absorbed unless economic conditions are favourable;, care should be taken that in any actions proposed or implemented to increase the population by artificial rather than by natural means, the general standard of living of the people of the. Dominion is not reduced.” VITAL TO PROSPERITY. ” Production from the 30,000,000 acres pf poorer land in occupation in the Dominion is vital to New Zealand’s prosperity,” said Mr O’Shea. “It cannot'be done without unless we have a smaller population and/or a lower standard of living.” In natural resources, including farming land, the Dominion was one of the poorest countries in the world. Probably the only other countries which might be considered comparably as poor were Switzerland and Japan, but they were situated alongside countries with considerable mineral resources, and they also had proximity to large markets which made it possible for them to carry on manufacturing for export on a scale unlikely to be possible in New Zealand. The . Dominion would never be able to compete in the world markets in anything other than primary products. For a larger population to be of assistance so far as New Zealand’s internal consumption of its main exports was concerned, Mr O’Shea said. the . increase necessary to make an appreciable difference would have to be enormous. In dairy produce the population would have to be more than doubled, and there was no possibility of an-in-creased population having an appreciable effect on wool production, Farming was the economic basis of the whole life, : and to increase the tovyn. a s compared With the country population would simply mean that the proportion of the people who were contributing less than the farming community to the carrying on of the economic life of ibhe country would be increased.

The possibilities of the subdivision of sheep 'farming, properties were exceedingly limited, he continued, since there were ditiy about 2,500 flocks of over 2,500 sheep in the . Dominion, and these flocks were situated‘almost entirely on the poorer land where it was essential to ’ make the most efficient possible use of capital. The hope, of absorbing population by expanding the dairy, industry was a vain hope since the 40-hour week policy was designed to reduce the dairy industry in size, and eventually; extinguish it if the policy were carried to its logical conclusion;

“ The real •solution of our, population problem—if a larger population is required,”. said Mr O’Shea, “ is to make it possible for them to be employed on or through the poorer land in New Zealand, which consists of : at least 30.000,000 acres. The lower cost basis would make this possible, but the number of peonle who would thus be absorbed is limited, and will not run the millions generally snoken of. The fact that we have onlv 10.000.000 acres of land of reasonable natural or induced, fertility is a dominant factor in the whole of our economic life.”