BRITISH FARMERS UNDER STIFF PRODUCTION CONTROL FOOD MINISTRY TAKES ALL

Gisborne Herald, Volume LXXVI, Issue 22952, 21 May 1949, Page 4

BRITISH FARMERS UNDER STIFF PRODUCTION CONTROL

FOOD MINISTRY TAKES ALL

pARMERS in New Zealand wlio consider that the Gov-

ernment has far too much to say about the marketing of their produce and the general financing of their production activities are actually better off than they realise.

They have not yet reached the stage where they are told by a Ministry agency what crops they may raise, what to do with a broken-legged sheep, or what they may do with eggs produced in their own fowl-yards. All these and more of the farmers’ activities are covered by State regulations in the United Kingdom, according to Mr C. C. Laver, who recently returned to New Zealand after two years’ residence in Britain

for it. A large portion of it stayed in the stack. Nevertheless, the farmers were required to plant barley_ again in the same quantity for the current agricultural year, and against all their inclinations and experience of marketing, they had to comply. Governmental supervision of farming docs not stop at directing the planting programme. A farmer cannot dispose of his own meat production, all of which has to be accounted for to the Food Ministry. Jf a sheep breaks a leg, the owner has to secure a.veterinarian’s certificate permitting its destruction. But the farmer cannot slaughter the sheep and use the meat. Someone else comes with a humane killer and disposes of the animal, after which the carcase is borne away and absorbed into the general supply. The farmer gets his money, but he gets none of the meat. Even the Farmer’s Wife Affected The farmer’s wife does not do what she likes with her poultry. The number of hens is registered and the use of grain closely controlled. Eggs have to be sold to the Government agencies, and the farmer’s wife may get one out of each dozen produced. The idea that people in the farming areas are vastly better off for food supplies than the city populations is quite incorrect says Mr. Laver. They do a little better, but they have to account closelv for all food produced and consumed. The farmer can raise a pig for home-curing, and this is a decided advantage, but the Government naturally adjusts his rations of meat from other sources. In general he is little better fed than the townsman. On top of his other worries, he has had plenty of indications that the nationalisation of land is in the offing. Already the farming industry is much under the thumb of union organisers. The agricultural workers’ union has secured regulations which require an average farm of 150 acres to employ at least two men, one of whom is a hedger and ditcher and the other a general worker. These men have to be provided with cottages and paid in good or bad seasons.

Network of Regulations Born in England, Mr. Laver spent spent some years in New Zealand prior to the First World War, and returned after some years to resume farming in this district, and later in Hawke's Bay. He has spent the past two years in England, where he owned a farm in Kent and found himself up against a network of regulations and restrictions which represent Britain’s farm-produc-tion scheme. The set-up is partly a legacy of the war years and partly the development of political ideas upon land management, administered from Whitehall and subject to all the shortcomings of a scheme which ignores the human element. The English farmer does not enjoy any of the freedom of his counterpart in New Zealand. Food Ministry officials determine what shall be grown in the United Kingdom and through district agricultural committees pass their instructions to the individual farmers. The district committees, with quotas allotted, proceed to inform the occupiers of farm lands what they can do in the way of cropping, depasturing of stock, and other forms of production. No Guaranteed Price There is no guaranteed price, 'but the Food Ministry has a scheme which in the event of a poor market for any product will cover the farmer’s costs only. Farming is so diversified that if one line fails others usually provide the farmer with his subsistence, at least; but his life is a harrassing one at best. Last year, for instance, the district committee in Mr. Laver’s neighbourhood was instructed to have barley grown. A terrific amount of barley was sown and reaped, but there was no sale

Modest Living at Best It is a tribute to the fertility of the land that with a winter season of seven months, during which all stock has to be housed and fed, the industry manages to carry its burden and provide the farmers with a modest living.

That seems to be the best that anyone can expect today in Britain, where the strain of the post-war years is telling heavily on everyone. Assurances that the country’s economic position is improving are gratifying, but they do not feed the people any better. Hunger is a real factor there, and nostalgia for the old days when people could buy what they liked is prevalent.

Visitors to the United Kingdom see the shops stocked with goods and receive the impression that things are not as bad as they have been represented. They do not realise that the individual s share of the goods displayed is almost infinitesimal, by New Zealand standards for instance.

They eat at hotels or restaurants and conclude that meals are not so bad; but this is a delusion produced by the cunning hand of the chef, who has learned the art of making much out of little. Substance is lacking from these meals, just as it is from the diet of the family unit. |

An indication of the food position is provided by Mr. Laver’s situation as a farmer in Kent. Prior to going Home two years ago he arranged for a monthly food-parcel from a Hawke’s Bay firm, and after a few months on British rations the arrival of a parcel from New Zealand became a real landmark In the family life.