SHEEP FARMERS

Hokitika Guardian, 27 April 1939, Page 6

SHEEP FARMERS

DENIAL OF SUBSIDY REQUEST.

(Per Press Association.—Copyright).

.CHRtSTCfIuRCH, April 26.

A denial that he had discussed a subsidy with the Prim.e J\linister_(Rt. lion. iVI. J. Savage), was made, by Mr W. W. Mulholland, President of the New Zealand Farmers’ Union, in a statement before the North Canterbury Executive of the . Union. Mr Mulholland said that the summary published .with the report of. his recent interview with Mr Savage had given the'impression that he had asked for a subsidy of from £5,009,000 to £7, 000,7000. “I am afraid that people got; the 7 impression that I asked for a subsidy,” said Mr Mulholland. “Subsidies •were ; never discussed, In tlfe body of tlie report the position - was sthted correctly. In a bit, in the summary at the top of the report, which was sent throughout New Zealand by the Press Association, an unfortunate impression was given.”. ; . ' The figure of £5,000,000 to £7,000,000 was mentioned l in the interview, said Mr Mulholland, but it was merely hy-jvvay, of illustrating what a guaranteed price would mean. Mr Savage raised the question of a guaranteed ' price, but,lofficially/ because he had no instructions to ac. so from the - Union he (Air Mulholland) could not dis- , cuss it. :jj • j Mr Mulholland said he did discuss a-guaranteed .price.. l informally*-..He - told the Prime Minister that ihe;experience of the dairy farmers' did not suggest that the solution of the sheep farmers’ difficulties lay in a guaran- - teed price.” ; < - ; -- ; i “I said that £5,000,000,t0,£7,000,000 would be necessary to finance'a guaranteed price,” said Mr Mulholland, -‘and I asked if the Government could find that amount. That was the only reference to money, ' I also asked Mr Savage,to lctrrfe'-have a memorandum of what ho thought could be how it could be done. The report itself makes that quite clear but the summary was misleading. It is very unfortunate, that all oypr the country an entirely misleading -summary|q£ the interview has been published. I hope my explanation will be given as. wide ■ publicity as the erroneous •summary,”: