SHARP EXCHANGE

Hawera Star, Volume LIV, 27 February 1935, Page 9

SHARP EXCHANGE

MR COATES AND MR POLSON

VIEWS OF THE FARMERS’ UNION

CONTRADICTORY RESOLUTIONS

The attitude of the farming community toward the Mortgage Corporation Bill was an issue sharply contested between the Rt. Hon. «T. G. Coates and Air W. J. Poison. “The farmers would" prefer no Bill at all and an extension of the powers of the mortgage adjustments commissions rather than have the shareholder provisions in this Bill,” said Air Poison. “They also want" the abolition of the personal covenant.”

Air Coates: Are you opposing the Mortgage Corporation? Air Poison: I am saying that in its present form it is not acceptable. The machinery of the corporation would suit well if the control was in the proper hands. Air Coates: Am I wrong in saying the New Zealand Farmers’ Union has approved the principle, of the Bill? Air Poison: They approve of the machinery.

Air Coates: No, no. They have approved the Bill. Air Poison: They will not stand for shareholder capital. That provision vitiates the whole Bill. Air Coates: Y T ou were instructed to vote for the Bill.

Mr Poison: By whom? Air Coates: The Farmers’ L'nion

Air Poison: Nothing of the kind

Air Coates: I have resolutions •tc that effect from your own meetings.

Air Poison: I have no recollection of that, and I won't take instructions. I reserve the right to exercise my-own judgment in this House. 1 can show

you resolutions opposing this Bill. Air Coates: And I can show you others directly contrary to that. Air Poison: Weil, they have not been shown to me, and I think I have the confidence of the farmers as much as you have, although I know you carry a good deal of weight with the farmers.

“Will you listen to this?” asked Air Coates, who then proceeded to read a resolution, passed at a large and representative meetings of fanners at Mayfield, commencing the Bill. “And I can quote some more,” added Mr Coates.

Air Poison: Where is Alayfield: That is a resolution passed at some out-of-the-way place, and it was not a Farmers’ Union meeting. Air Coates: I have some more here. Air Poison: That was not an executive meeting. It was a branch meeting in some out-of-the-way community. Sonic of your friends have been trying to do you a good turn Inputting that through. Mr 11. G. Dickie (Govt., Patea) said it was unfortunate that leaders in the farmers’ organisations were stating tliat money from the, corporation would cost up to 7 per cent.... .

Air Poison: That is in Mr Coates’ own pamphlet.

“NOT WORTH HAVING.”

Air C. A. Wilkinson (Ind., Egmont) claimed that he was in touch with us many farmers as any other member of the House, and that all the farmers he had consulted liad been unsatisfied with the Bill. They thought it was not worth having. Unless the next Bill brought real relief to the farmer in the shape of reduced interest rates and written-off capital, there would bo very bitter and widespread disappointment.

Later Air Poison returned to the attack armed with several resolutions which had been passed by meetings of farmers. He said that the national executive of the Farmers’ Union liad unanimously approved the mortgage corporation “so long as it secured a reduction in the interest rate to farmers, and so long as it was under corporative control, or alternatively State control, preferably the former.” This resolution had been carried by the national executive after hearing the Alinister himself. Mr Poison also quoted from resolutions passed by meetings of farmers at Gisborne and Hawera. The Gisborne resolution disapproved of shareholder capital in the mortgage corporation and congratulated Mr Poison on the stand he had taken. The Hawera resolution expressed a deep sense of disappointment and dismay at the form in which the Bill had been presented to Parliament. In reply to Air Coates, Air Poison said that- lie had no two resolutions alike, and that none of them had been prepared previously. They had all been spontaneous and uninspired. The whole organisation of the Farmers’ Union had in every case opposed the principle of share capital.