The Gisborne Times PUBLISHED DAILY TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 13, 1928. THE BAY OF PLENTY SEAT.

Gisborne Times, Volume LXVIII, Issue 10742, 13 November 1928, Page 4

The Gisborne Times PUBLISHED DAILY TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 13, 1928. THE BAY OF PLENTY SEAT.

On the occasion of this yeni s General Elections, the Hon. K. S. Williams has been called upon—for the first time since 1919—t0 defend his seat, that of the Bay of Plenty. Mr. Williams 0 being opposed by a Labor candidate, Mr. Moncur, of Whakatane,’ and, incidentally, it is the first time a Laborite lias ever made a bid for political honors in Connection with the electorate. It would seem that the main reason why Mr Moncur was invited to Hi the Labor banner in the Bay of Plenty was .to keep the Minister for Public Works as much as possible inhis electorate during the campaign. Too much would it have been to expect him to ' beat such • a popular member and Minister as Mr Williams has proved himself. It is, indeed, very pleasing to place on record, in connection with this contest, that it has been fought in an exemplary 'spirit. Mr. Williams’ tribute to Mr. Moncur’3 fine political sportsmanship will he re-echoed by the whole of the electors throughout the district. As regards, what will be the result, nobody—not even Mr. Moncur—can have the slightest doubt. Mr, Williams’ l’ecord as a private member has. been marked by the keenest passible attention to the requirements of every portion of his extensive electorate. What is more, his worth in the political arena! has been sealed by his elevation to one of the most im.poi-

tant offices in the Ministry of the day. During his campaign, Mr Williams has not only defended the Government’s legislation and administration ill a very sound manner, but

ho lias also combatted, with skill, the planks in the Labor platform pleaded by Mr. Moncur. In particular, the Minister has been to the utmost pains to show, conclusively, that immigration was not at the root of the unemployment problem and that the Government lias done, and is continuing to do, everything in its power to assist in meeting the difficulty. As regards Labor’s State* Bank proposal, Mr, Williams made it plain that all institution- of that kind could not be the means of providing money at cheaper rates - than those ruling; from time to time and that the people’s best financial safeguard is the-system of ; trading banks, under which outside monetary resources can be promptly brought to the Dominion’s aid at a time of depression or in ally financial emergency. Ag many - as possible - of the electors who appreciate the Minister’s political worth, and high personal qualities should to-morrow, make a special poiiit of recording their votesj so that the Bay of Plenty may Again show its utmost confidence'in him and return him, on this. occasion, • with a record majority. 1 CAN THE PRODUCERS TRUST LABOUR? One of the greatest blunders that Labor lias made during - the just'closing campaign was to resurrect, for. party purposes, the ill-fated dairy control scheme., Mr. Holland lias once again, pressed’ the claim that; tho scheme was killed - by the Government. Now- ; if what he avers happened to be true-—and it isn’t—-it would have constituted

otia of the best day’s -work ever done by the present Government, The scheme was bound to fail for two reasons (1) that those who handle New Zealand dairy produce at Home were opposed to it and (2) that the British housewife 1 became convinced that the principle of dictated prices was not in her interests. Mr Holland has, of course, wept crocodile tears over the death of the scheme because co-operative marketing is akin to Labor’s ideal as -to how 7 thisDominion’s produce should he marketed. It seems to be overlooked by him that those who originally favored the principle have now the least to say about it—they prefer to try and forget how expensive the experiment proved. In this regard, Weddel and Coy.’s annual report on Britain’s Imported Dairy Produce Trade for the year ended June 30, 1928, which is just to hand, contains an interesting reference to the scheme which dairy farmers in parcular would do, well to ponder over:

“It was,” it says, “just as great a relief to the New Zealand section of the trade in tlie United Kingdom as it was to producers generally in New Zealand to be free of all official control and able to conduct the business on ordinary commercial lines. At the conclusion of the experiment, both shippers and importers were glad to be relieved .of the irritation inseparable from such outside domination, to say nothing of the enormous losses amounting to several millions sterling, suffered by the dairy companies as a result of the Control Board fiasco. Full advantage was taken of tho opportunity of contracting for the sale of outputs of dairy factories oil a -forward basis. Buyers on this side, as well as Canadian and American operators who purchased New Zealand and Australian butter for forward shipment during September, October and November last year, must havo lost heavily, as market prices for several months afterwards ruled on a lower scale.”

It will thus be seen that, if the dairy control scheme had been persevered with for only a few more months, this Dominion would have lost even more heavily than was, unhappily, the case. Not for a long tiipe will any large body of dairy farmers dare to suggest that an attempt should again be made to dictate on the Home markets. How the revival of such a painful subject eoukl help the Labor Party at tomorrow’s elections is really beyond understanding. In strict, fact, its resurrection should make all classes of producers extremely suspicious of Labor’=i intentions, as far as their interests are concerned, if it should ever -reach the Treasury Benches.