Lake Wakatip Mail QUEENSTOWN, TUESDAY, JULY, 20 3937

Lake Wakatip Mail, Issue 4323, 20 July 1937, Page 4

Lake Wakatip Mail QUEENSTOWN, TUESDAY, JULY, 20 3937

FARMERS’ PROBLEMS. NEVER before In the history of New Zealand . has the fanning community taken, such an interest in politics as is manifested to-day. The reason is plain to see. A Labour Government is in office which has embarked on a policy that is a radical departure from anything that has been introduced into the country before. The farming community had a particularly bad time during the depression years. Drastic measures had to be taken by the ‘Coalition Government. This brought on it a large amount of unpopularity in town and country alike. The result was that many votes were cast against it at the General Election that would in normal circumstances have gone in its, favour. Thus we had in many of the rurail constituencies the spectacle of Labour members being returned. The Labour .leaders held out various inducements

to the men on the land to give them their support. Among the measures promised was the graduated prices

scheme for dairy products. That promise was fulfilled and the Primary Products .Marketing Act was passed, and is now in operation. The dairy farmer imagined that by stabilising the price of Ills commodity, his lot

would be improved. He reasoned on a wrong foundation, for what ho gained in one way he has more than lost in another. Last week in Wellington the annual conference of the Hew Zealand Farmers’ Union was held, and the president made some pointed remarks upon the present political trends. Referring to the great inflation of costs brought about by the Government iS legislation, .Mr Mulhoiland pointed out that the restoration of the 1931 rates of wages placed wages on the' level of the farmers’ prices in 1928-29. In addition, there had been the fort\ - hour week and the restrictions imposed by the Shops and Offices and Factories Acts. A multitude of other regulatory measures had also added to the farmers’ costs. In particular the Government’s policy in regard to transport had materially increased transport costs', and threatened to raise them very much higher in the future. In the last seven years ■ taxation had increased enormously, and the effect was severe on the primary producer. Mr Mulhoiland expressed the opinion that if the mounting farm costs are- to be borne without severe economic distress farmers’ prices toiust be maintained at as high, if not a somewhat higher, level than those ruling in 1938-29. The term of one year that was fixed for the guaranteed price now is nearly at an end, and a new ar- j rangemcnt will have to- be made. Ministers at different times have suggested, if they have not actually stated, that it will be increased, but i obviously that sort of thing cannot go on indefinitely. The Minister 1 of Agriculture realises this, for he said in a recent speech, “We cannot go on raising the guaranteed price again and again, but once having arrived at a fair price ito pay for dairy produce, we must turn our attention to cutting costs.’’ This sounds farcical the way things are going, but the methods of achieving such a result as propounded by Mr Lee Martin are a reduction of interest rates, nationalisation of the methods of production, lowering the price of manures, and the -efficient working of the zoning system. Even if these proposals were practicable, which is very doubtful, it would take time to put them into successful operation. In the meantime the dairy farmer would be heavily handicapped. The present Government is a Labour Governiment imbued with Socialistic ideas, while the farming community are individualistic in their outlook, believing in the system of private enterprise under which the Dominion’s prosperity has been built up and maintained. At the Farmers’ Union Conference Mr Mulhoiland said that a vital point in the platform of his organisation was its opposition to Socialism. This was affirmed by the delegates which decided “that the Farmers’ Union is opposed to State ownership and the control of the means of production, distribution, and exchange,” which has been a Labour goal for many years. Viewing the position as it stands to-day it would be absurd to expect the present Ministry’s policy to work to the advantage of the rural com'mmunity. The Government no doubt like to see the farmers prosperous, hut in the very nature of things its legislation cannot be expected to achieve that result. It is before everything a Government for town workers, and its industrial legislation is framed to that end. The Farmers’ Union and the Federation of Labour cannot bo expected to run in. easy co-operation. The former organisation is a powerful I ody. Whatever 'Government is in office it must wield a big political influence, though not so much with the present Government as with the Opposition, its natural ally. Mr Mulhoiland stresses the point that to make the Farmers’ Union an effective force unity is essential, and he asked for cordial c-o-Opcration in achieving that end.