Greymouth Evening Star. WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 18, 1946. The Farmer Learns

Greymouth Evening Star, 18 September 1946, Page 6

Greymouth Evening Star. WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 18, 1946. The Farmer Learns

'p.HREE Supreme Court Judges to whom the questions’ of local butter subsidies and cost allowances in the dairy industry was referred last year, have ruled in a majority finding in favour of the Government. This means that the Government’s action in taking money from the industry’s own stabilisation accounts —between £3,000,000 and £4,000,000 has been so used —to keep down the cost of butter and cheese to the local consumer has been justified on the basis of the law. Th'e producer has been forced to subsidise the consumer from his own sayings. In other words the Government has been obtaining butter from the farmer and selling it on the local market at less than the cost of production. To cover its loss, it has not recouped itself from general revenue as it does with subsidies and other commodities, but has raided unashamedly that portion of the proceeds from the export of dairy products that it has insisted should be paid into reserve.

The farmers have, of course, accepted the Supreme Court Judges’ decision, for the Judges have merely interpreted the legislation and agreements relating to the . matter in dispute. It was the Government, it has to be remembered, that wrote the law. The farmers can now see for themselves how carefully the Government has framed the laws so that they can be interpreted only to its own benefit. Despite the fact that the Judges’ decision has, in effect, granted legal authority for continuance of its present policy, the Government has now decided, that the subsidy on dairy produce for local consumption will in the current year be paid from the Consolidated Fund, which, is built up largely from revenue derived from ordinary taxation. It has been stipulated that this fund is to take over the debit for one year only. This decision .can be regarded as nothing else than an indication that the Government is not altogether happy about the propriety of paying the subsidy from the producers’ own funds. After all, no other section of the community is levied in such a. way. But why this belated change of heart? If it is right this year to pay the money from the Consolidated Fund, wlij was such a policy not followed when the subsidy scheme was introduced? The Government has laid itself open to a charge of making an electionwear gesture. The producer • will not, however, overlook the fact that the Government retains the power to demand that the price of local subsidies on his produce must be paid from his own. pocket, and the lesson he has had will not be lost on other sections of the community. The farmers, at ■ least, will not be so easily hoodwinked again. Flowers and Beauty yi-TE flower shows which are being held in the district this week should, serve as a reminder to the community that the societies which conduct them serve a purpose which cannot be measured in tangible terms. Their aim is the promotion and advancement of horticulture in all its branches by providing opportunity for the discussion of matters of mutual interest to members and by conducting shows at intervals. From the public s point of view, however, their work must be considered in its wider aspect, in that any movement which tends to raise the standard of horticulture and widen its practice must benefit the community generally. The beautification of a town, particularly the residential area, it must be remembered, depends not so much on the work of the civic authorities as on the individual efforts of the people who live in it. Actually, in the final analysis, the appearance of a borough is a reflection of the character of its residents generally. It is on the value of their work to the community that horticultural societies base their appeal for public support, lhey have need of it. Indeed it must be disheartening to members to find that their work does not receive greater practical appreciation. There is no adequate reason why, given sufficient encouragement, they should not broaden the scope of their activities with the object of providing a stimulus to the beautification of the town and its enviions. If more wore accomplished in this lespect there would be far less cause foi critical comment, such as that made recently by a visiting English journalist. There is’ no doubt that he exaggerated, but even so there will be few who rrill deny that scope for improvement does indeed exist. The complaint voiced by the English visitor is, of course, largely one for the attention of the local authorities, but any movement whose work must tend to create a wider appreciation of aesthetre values is deserving of the encouragement of the community.