THE H.B. TRIBUNE WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 18, 1933 FARMERS’ RESOLUTIONS.

Hawke's Bay Tribune, Volume XXIII, Issue 31, 18 January 1933, Page 6

THE H.B. TRIBUNE WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 18, 1933 FARMERS’ RESOLUTIONS.

Interesting reading is provided of proceedings at the conference of primary producers which was convened by the New Zealand Farmers’ Union and which began yesterday. In his opening address the president of the Union, Mr. W. J. Polson, M.P., was careful to impress upon his audience the necessity for giving due consideration to the interests of other sections of the community that were not represented at the meeting. “We must not,” he said, “be forgetful of the rest of the community. No plan can succeed that does hot take all sections into account, and it is not the duty of the Government to spoon-feed any particular class.” But, while making- this broad admission, the president was equally careful to stress the point that “upon the fate of the primary producers rests the fate of the whole community,” a statement at once inferring that special regard must be had to the preservation of rural interests. This is a proposition that would seem to have secured general acceptance and it was certainly the keynote of the discussions that have so far taken place at the conference and of the resolutions so far adopted. The first subject that was specifically considered was that of exchange, of which the speaker who introduced it, Mr. James Begg, of Dunedin, truly premised that little that was new could be said about it. as it had been hammered out for at least twelve month-:

past. Even he was bound to confess, however, that with regard to it the farmers had not, been altogether consistent. Nine months ago they were clamouring that exchange should be left free to settle itself, now they were about to demand that it should be pegged at a high rate. In the end a resolution was passed, by a five to one majority, calling upon the Government to take measures for establishing a rate at least equal to that holding in Australia and Argentina, New Zealand’s chief competitors in the British markets. Quite valid arguments were adduced by those who voted against the motion. On the one hand, it was pointed out that an artificially high rate dictated by the Government would mean a State indemnity io the banks against profitless accumulations of credit. Then, too, it was also pointed out that the export season was now far advanced and that no benefit would come to those whose produce had already been marketed. These suggestions, however, appear to have carried but little weight. Having thus disposed of the exchange question to the satisfaction of the great majority, the meeting then proceeded to the discussion of import tariffs and, “by a large majority,” a motion was carried involving “an immediate substantial reduction in New Zealand’s existing tariff rates.” However desirable this may be in a general way and in keeping with the Ottawa agreements, it is not going to help very much the secondary industries that, directly and indirectly, provide employment throughout the year for considerably more hands than the primary. Taking these two resolutions together, we find the Government asked, in the first place, to raise the exchange against itself in respect of the heavy remittances of interest it has to make on account of Lon. don loan money, and also to aceept the contingent liability to protect the banks. At the same time, it is also to be deprived of a “substantial” portion of the revenue derived from Customs duties, and that, too, without any hint being given as to how this is to be made good. The third resolution passed was “that the Government be urged to bring interest rates in New Zealand down in conformity with reductions in other parts of the world”—what “other parts” are not mentioned. It would, of course, be very pleasant for many of us if such a reduction could be brought about. But it has to be borne in mind that interest rates must always depend very largely upon the character of the security. It can scarcely be said that what the farmers are asking is likely to promote confidence in mortgage investments. Much more likely is it to drive loose capital into other channels, even if rates there should be still lower. Incidentally, it may be mentioned that the seconder of this resolution spoke of “interest rates in New Zealand being about the highest m the world.” This can only mean that he has but scant knowledge of the rates rub ing on Hke investments in continental countries, and possibly even in the United States and Canada.