MR J. O’BRIEN, M.P.

Grey River Argus, 1 December 1938, Page 8

MR J. O’BRIEN, M.P.

MEETS FARMERS

Address at Kokatahi

On Tuesday evening, Mr J. O’Brien, M.P. addressed a very largely attended meeting of members of the Koka-tahi-Koiterangi Farmers’ Union at Longford Hall, Kokatahi. Previous to Mr O’Brien’s starting his address, Mrs O’Brien gave a brief talk to members of the Women’s Division of the Farmers’ Union. In introducing Mr O’Brien, Mr Mark Wallace, chairman) of the Union, stated he extended the’ thanks of the Union to Mr O’Brien, who was there that evening to giva some indication of the Government’s intention towards the farming industry. ’ -4 • In opening his address, Mr O’Brien stated that he was there that evening more in the nature of a listener than a lecturer. He Wished, at the outset, to give some indication to the fsjfrmers of their problems as they appeared to the Government. Going back over the position of. the farming industry, particularly in the period after the Great War, he recalled that there came a rapid rise in prices, and an equally rapid rise in land values. The price of land doubled and trebled itself in two or. three years, and speculation in land was rife. Some years ago, they had traced one farm that had Changed hands six times in.two years, and prices had risen from £2O per acre in the first place to £l2O per acre at the last sale. By this time stamp duties and transfer fees and solicitor’s charges had mounted to over £2O an acre. In the period of inflation, moneylenders rushed to lend money to farmers on these fictitious values. Even Government Departments weld included in this category. The State Advances Corporation leaded up to 75 per cent, on farm property, while prices were high. When butter-fat slumped from 2s 6d per lb. to 7d per lb. the crash came until over 50 per cent, of the farmers, or really five out of six of them, were insolvent. The bankruptcy statistics showed, over a period of years, that those engaged in agricultural and pastoral industry headed the list of all the bankrupts. They showed that, since the Wdr, the figures of agricultural bankrupts had been as high at 222 per dnnum, but the number had gradually been reduced, until 1936, with the advent of the Labour Government, the bankruptcies had been reddeed to 42. It was also rather remarkable that, in the other industries ahd professions, the number of bankrupts had been reduced by 50 per cent. For instance in 1933, there were 450 bankrupts, and in 1938 only 221/ The rural mortgages had mounted to £135,000,000 and, with the low price of farm produce, the farming industry was in a wretched position. The problem was how to keep the man on the land. In 1935, the income of the small farmer, with unimproved value of £3OOO or under, was only £lO2 per annum. The Government thfen considered something had to be done. First of all, the debt burden had to be lifted, and the Agricultural Commission and Court of Review were authorised to undertake the adjustment of all mortgages and cancel mortgages that the farmers could not possibly pay interest on. Some £7,000,000 of mortgages had already been written off. H 6 did not say this was sufficient, but ‘he pointed out that this entailed hardship on some money lenders. He Was not concerned about the money lender who made such a business, but Was concerned about z the poor people who invested a life time’s savings in second mortgages, and lost the lot. However, the reduction of 'mortgages was not sufficient, and the Government then considered it necessary to bring in a guaranteed price. As soon as this was suggested, members of the Party to which he belonged were attacked on all sides. Some rather extraordinary things were said about the guaranteed price, and the country was warned that, if what was suggested by the Labour Party was enacted, it would cost them anything from £10,000,009 to £20,000,000 onwards. When, however, the guaranteed price was brought in, the opponents of it said it was, rtbt sufficient, and many of them suggested a compensated price. It was remarkable that Mr Hamilton, speaking., at Martinborough in 1937, as reported in the "Evening Post”, warned his audience against the theory of compensated prices. In a year’s time, Mr Hamilton stated, at Morrinsville. that for years he had acknowledged the justice of a compensated price! Controversy rose between members of the Farmers’ Union and members of the Nationalist Party. While one section would haggle over costs and say that what was necessary was to bring the price of produce up, others were stating that mostly all that was necessary was to bring down Costs. It was suggested, also, that we cduld follow the Australian system, which was somewhat similar to the Paterson Plan, but those who suggested that did not take into cohsideration the fact that, while Australia exported only a little over 50 per cent, of butter produced, New Zealand exported over 83 per cent., and, even if the price of butter locally was increased by ,81d per lb., bringing it up to 2s ’or a little more, that Would only give a subsidy of 1.39 d per lb. on the butter exported. If the price locally increased to 4s, it would not have an effect equal to that df the present guaranteed price. Colonel Closey, in 1935, had suggested, as a compensated price, the difference . between an article imported and the cost landed in New Zealand, plus the price of butter-fat, and held it would work out, taking a certain figure, at Is 41d per lb.; but if the figures’of 1930 were taken,, and Colonel Closey’s formula applied, they would get 9.21 d per lb. The Government had bfeen accused of commandeering the farmers’ butter in its marketing department, but what had actually been done was that Tooley Street manipulators had had their wings clipped. The savings to the farming industry by the Government taking over werg £219,000 per annum. An agreement with Germany, whereby they took New Zealand butter for a portion of th,e goods purchased from Germany, meant that butter had been increased on the London market by 4s per hundredweight. Remarkable, tbo, was the criticism levelled at the Government because the recommendation of the guaranteed price committee was not

taken this year; but last year when the average recommended by the committee was 13.41 d per lb. the price paid by the Government was 13.6 fad per lb., which was Id more than the committee’s recommendation, however, all kinds of arguments had been used against the guaranteed price, but he was satisfied a huge majority of the farmers were in favour of the scheme. Dealing with the future policy ot the Government, Mr O’Brien stated there was a full demand for all we could produce. There had been a fan in sterling funds in London, principally because we had imported heavi y from Great Britain during the last two years, and, in order to restore our funds, it was necessary to have more production. Dealing with the Government’s proposals regarding land, he said there was a demand tor land for settlement all over New Zealand, and there were a large number of farmers looking for land to settle their sons on as they came o age. He stated the farmer had a greater sense of security when he got settled on a farm than probab y any other member of the community, was rather unfortunate that most ot the Crown land suitable for closer settlement had been taken U P> a ™’ while there was still some veiy larg areas that could be settled, ia liculty of the clearing and bunging in of the land was fairly obvious. Backblock roads and access to land were one thing, but clearing s and bringing it in was another J Most of the Crown land was either timbei

ed or swampy, and needed machines to clear or drain it. In February of | next year Mr P. C. Webb was having a demonstration of a giant machine for clearing land in the Buller dis-1 trict, and farmers should try and w t-| ness this demonstration. He was rather doubtful that “bull-dozeis would handle heavy timber, but tn y would probably clear the lighter land well. However, there were machines for ditching. They were successful; but the Government was not sure as to the effectiveness of these machines which , had to dig deeper ditches, u such machines were effective, the Government would not hesitate to provide them for the purpose of ditching nnd bringing in new country. They would probably be made available at the earliest possible date. Much had been done in bringing m new land, particularly pakihi, in Buller, and pumice land in the North Island. Waste areas in the North Island had been converted into land that would take a beast to the acre, and it could be done in other paris of New Zealand. It was already held that large areas of land were not adequately farmed, and such owners were adopting a dog in the manger attitude; they would not farm the land themselves, nor let anybody else do so. This question would have to be dealt with, and the land would , have to be tak.en at valuation so that the country could increase its production. Mr O’Brien concluded, asking his listeners to give their views on the question he had been talking about. , Mr T. O’Neil brought up the matter of shortage of workers, and said it would be impossible to increase the production unless they had workers to assist them on the farms. He suggested that farmers should be allowed to nominate farm workers from Denmark to assist, as Danish people who had come to New Zealand were exceptionally good farmers. He asked that We Government consider this question. 1 Mr O’Brien replied that the Government had given considerable consideration to the question of supplying farm workers. Already, if farm workers were found on public works they were discharged, and the question of ‘bringing farm workers to New Zealand from Australia and other countries had been considered, too, but no finality had been come to. Mr Marshall asked whether the Government would drain swamps held privately. Several other members of the Union also spoke along these lines. Mr O’Brien stated that, probably, some assistance would be given to some, but the Government would not assist people who could well afford to do their own drainage and to pay something towards the cost or rent of the machines.

Mr Shannon asked if it would be possible to have a branch of the State Advances Coroporation in Hokitika, stating it was very unsatisfactory to do business with the branch at Nelson.

Mr O’Brien promised to bring this matter under the notice of the Government.

Several others discussions took place. The Women’s Division of the Farmers’ Union treated all present to a delightful supper. Mr Wallace then moved a motion of thanks to Mr O’Brien for coming to the meeting of the Union, and stated that the evening had been highly instructive, and, on behalf of the Union, he wished to thank Mr and Mrs O’Brien. This was seconded by Mr P. Jones and carried by acclamation. Mr O’Brien suitably responded, and moved a vote of thanks to the chair. The meeting was brought to a close well after midnight.