Greymouth Evening Star. AND BRUNNERTON ADVOCATE. TUESDAY, AUGUST 30th., 1932. TOWN v. COUNTRY.

Greymouth Evening Star, 30 August 1932, Page 4

Greymouth Evening Star. AND BRUNNERTON ADVOCATE. TUESDAY, AUGUST 30th., 1932. TOWN v. COUNTRY.

PARLIAMENT is clue to reassemble within a month, and politicians are preparing for the fray. Publicity is being sought for Members’ opinions, Ministers are emphasising the unity and happiness of Coalition councils, whilst Labourites are, as always, all things to all men, in their endeavour to attract support. Forecasts of Government policy are being launched, and perhaps, apathy prevails only among the electors. These find it difficult to work up excitement from session probabilities. They expect talk to be the most prominent feature of the whole proceedings in the House, and will be happy if they are disappointed. Among the battle-cries already raised is the old one of town v I

country. According to Mr. McLeod, | an ex-Minister and of some pro- , minenee in farming circles, rivalry between : town and country has rapidly developed since the general elections. Not many others have noticed it, and most people will hope that Mr. McLeod is mistaken. A more stupid attitude than that of town and country fighting each other, instead of co-operating, would be difficult to imagine. Both sides realise that neither can do without the other, and unless one prospers, the other cannot. This is but re-stating truisms. What has developed since the slump came is a desire by both town and country dwellers to - let the other fellow share most of the burden. The Government, as adjudicator, has held the scales justly, and although anomalies exist, the result on the whole has been a fair deal all round. Much is heard perhaps from farmers about, their losses in recent years, but they have no monopoly of debits. Many a city firm or business has been hard hit; moreover, taxation has been at least, as heavy on the urban payers as on their country Farmers should profit from a recovery in prices quicker than will townsmen, and in any competition for a hardluck story, the material at command of town and country would make the contest very even'. Recognition of each other’s difficulties will help to minimise any animosity between the two.

Labour, with its delight in fishing in troubled waters, will make' the most of any jealousy arising between town and country, despite Mr. Jordan’s denial. The “small” farmer is being particularly angled for, but is unlikely to be caught easily. He kndws that if his interests conflicted with those of the wage-earners, town or country, Labour would sacrifice him without hesitation. The Ottawa agreement has already been denounced by the Labour leader, because the advantages offered to New Zealand farmers may affect some Dominion secondary industries. Nor has the. New Zealand farmer, small or large, forgotten what ruin Labour rule brought to Australian primary producers. Whatever the errors oi the Coalition Ministry, it has proved to be a well-wisher to the farming community, doing its best to alleviate the consequences of the depression. Now that better times are coming, this, good work should not be forgotten, nor drowned by blatant and unfounded (Labour claims. The battle cry must not be Town v. Country, but Town and Country, against those whose political policy would ruin both.