HELP TO FARMERS.

Gisborne Times, Volume LXXXI, Issue 12398, 10 November 1934, Page 5

HELP TO FARMERS.

AGRICULTURAL BILL IN COMMITTEE ■ —— COMMISSION INCREASED TO FOUR OPPOSITION TO MEASURE " IMMEDIATE FINANCIAL AID URGED (Prewi Association* WELLINGTON, Nov. 9'. In tho House of Representatives to-day, the Agriculture (Emergency Powers) Bill was considered in committee. , The Hon. O. E. Hacmillan introduced a number of amendments, the principal of;which iwas increasing the membership op the Agriculture Commission to four and appointing the Minister chairman.

On the short title, Mr M. J. Sav age, the Leader of the Opposition, ■said he could -not see any alteration in principle at all. It was simply following the example of tile Unemloyment Board. I lie Minister would never occupy the chair, and the de-puty-chairman would be able to wan dor round the country as lie liked.

Ho iwas not averse to reorganising the dairy industry, hut considered that’they, should start with the mail who was up against it. Ho had a number of Communications, all except one against the.Bill. He hoped that ; the Bill, although apparently it had.’satisfied the-Coalition caucus, would not satisfy the House. He considered that' all the amendments would, be like plaster on a- wooden leg-and do, neither good nor harm. What; was wanted was financial usristance for those who. could not meet their bills now. Mr Savage asked the committee to, oppose the Bill.

GOVERNMENT ASKED TO POSTPONE BILL Mr Wilkinson (I.) said that there was 310 Immediate need lor the present bill, as it did not- provide financial assistance for the farmers. The bill would only load them up with further troubles. The appointment of the Minister as chairman of the commission would have no effect, as the other members could override him. He considered that the appointment of member;? for fWc years without the right of recall was monstrous, lie thought that members of the commission should not have the right to occupy any other position. He asked the Government, to hold the Bill over till February, a,s it was too momentous to : bo put through on the last djay of the session. If the Leader of the Opposition moved an amendment he would -support it.

FARMERS’ DISAPPROVAL Mr Poison (C.) said that it war. generally agreed that reorganisation was necessary, and the Bill provided reorganisation. He thought that there was a necessity for sonic such reorganisation as was provided In the .Bill. He saw no objection to separate hoards before action was taken, and it was a definite move for coordination .among those boards. The industry’s first call was for immediate relief, but lie thought he could say that the industry was anxious for reorganisation. The Bill did not meet with the general disapproval of men in the industry, except those intho Auckland district. The Bill, he was essential to control marketing and secure better trading arrangements.

‘ 'FASCIST ORGANISATION’ ’ Mr W. Nash (L.) said. he thought that the amendments made the position worse than the original Bill. The commission should be subject to the control of Parliament; otherwise it would become a Fascist organisation -as was known elsewhere. The Bill was simply giving power to the Government to- delegate power to another body. He opposed members being allowed to occupy -other positions, even farmers. A member should be pa:d such a sum as would render him tree from any other conflicting interest. Under the present clause, Mr William Goodfellow, Sir' AVilliam Hunt, or Mr David Jonco could be appointed to the commission. Ho asked why.the Minister was taking away the power of the board to Control the transport of milk and cream. ? Afr McLeod (C.) said that once the Dominion failed to find a market for pastoral produce, the standard of 11,v ing of all people in the Dominion must go down. He was -convinced Ihat unless some co-ordination, in the handling of produce took place, then the whole thing was to be made a plaything of politics, as it iiad Oeen made and was being made in the House that day. Air Stallworthy (1.) said that if the Government Mound it necessary to postpone the mortgage corpora-. fi°n legislation, which won id... give immediate financial relief to farmers; why not postpone the present Bill so as to give dairy farmers a reasonable opportunity to- express an opinion on it. . . ,

Air Armstrong (L.) considered that a sum of money should, bo -set aside for immediate assistance to farmers.

UROLLEM OF FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE : : ; Mr Coates said that the’’legislation affected only .those boards who bad legislation affecting their- boards. If other boards desired to be brought in, that could be -done, but. ft would have to be of their own volition.' AVas the country in a position to say what or how . financial assistance should be provided o tgivc tlic assist anee that was asked for? AVhat would happen wbemdhe,,industry was reorganised was another, -matter. Ho' agreed that the commission’s work was a- full-time job. The only way the small, man’s interest could bo looked after was by the appointment of a coinmi.ssio.il, and to have a-:i efficient organisation. Many marketing problems, such an quantities and quotas, had to- be coi -adored. lie thought 1 -that- the position tlie cdu'UU-, v .. ... iv.

try was facing was being..:lost sight of, and in order to give the assistance inquired It was necessary to have the organisation provided in the Bill.

WILL NOT VOTE ON AMENDMENT

Mr Veitcli (I.) said that, if the Gov eminent was wise it would 1 draft legislation dealing with financial assistance and reorganisation, submit it to the country, and give members an opportunity to consider it and enable them to come back to the House with definite views. The amendments to the Bill were so objectonable that ho did not propose to vote for it.

Mr Langstono (L.) said that although the Minister, as chairman of the commission, would provide a connecting link with Parliament, he did not see how hs presence would make any difference if the other three members put their heads together against him

Mr Dickie (C.) said that flic industry wanted to know wlrat powers the commission was going to have. The amendments as introduced were the result of representation!.?. made by the industry. Was the commission go ing to be cover tho Dairy Division ? The Government would also have three Government nominees on the Dairy Board. He thought that that was not necessary. He contended that if the price was to be guaranteed tho output would have to-be reduced. Air Carr (L.) said that financial assistance and control must go together. The control proposed was not cooperative, hut corporative, which was very different.

Q UALIFfCATIONS FOR COAiAQSSION.

Ali-. Jull (C) asked if it was intcncidecl that any member of the Meat Board, Daily Control Board, or other Board might he qualified to be a niember of the Agriculture Commission. He. contended that the question of marketing was the prime matter before the Dominion, and also asked if it was intended to secure the services of a man of London experience accustomed to handling that class of goods. Air. J. A. Nash (CJ said it was a matter of. necessity that members of the Commission should devote full time to the work. He thought the Gcvernent should agree to that. Air. Harris (C) criticised the possibility of a member of an individual board being also a member of the Commission. That, he contended, Would be undesirable.

Alessrs Poison (C) and Wilkinson (I) also urged that the Commissioners should not hold other positions. Air. AVilkinson said he would move an amendment in the direction of making members of the Commission, except the Alin ester of Agriculture, devote full time to the duty, and provided they should have no business on their own account or any interest in any business affected by the Commisiou.

The Hon. C. E. AlacAlillan said.lie could not accept Air. Wilkinson's amendment as it was too wide arid Would Vatlier restore the original clause. He was quite prepared to 3'ccomtncud the House to put that clause back.

MINISTER ALL-POWERFUL ON CO A 1 MISSION.

AH. Nash said the original clause was not wide enough, as the director of a dairy factory could be a member of the Commission. Air. Forbes said he knew of members of no board that put their private business before that of the board

Afr. L-angstone : The Government directors on the Bank of New Zealand. Mr. Forbes denied that this was so. It would be suicidal for any member of the Commission to retain interests in any concern affected by it. Members would bo too open to question, and their bona fides would be open to question. If the Minister were outvoted, or if members of the Commission abused their position, and he reported to Cabinet, their powers could be taken away by Order-in-Coun-cil so the Minister was all powerful.

BILL PASSED. The short title was carried by 37 votes to 2G. The Hon. C-. E. MacMillan agreed to retain the original sub-clause G of clause 3, with a consequential amendment exempting the Minister of Agriculture, and Mr. Wilkinson moved an amendment as previously indicated, to that sub-clause. Air. AVilkinson’-s amendent was lost by 35 votes to 27, and the original ciause as amended was carried.^ On clause 13, Air. Stallworthy (.1) moved to reduce the number of Government nominees on the Dairy Board to one instead of three. The amendment was lost by 54 votes to 71 The Committee stages were then completed, and tlie Bill was read a third time and passed.

BILL PASSES UPPER HOUSE. Moving the second reading of the Agriculture (Emergency Powers) Bill Mr;. Masters, said the- outstanding feature, of the. Dairy Commission’s report had; been, its .insistence on the highest quality : of the . goods which New Zealand exported,. -The -report also dealt comprehensively, with the question of marketing, which was of therutmost importance.- -The-need for the Bill was -generally ; recognisetH as a'means of helping the dairy farmer out of his difficult'-position-.’ The Bill was passed.