Manawatu Evening Standard. MONDAY, DEC. 28, 1925. THE FARMERS’ UNION.

Manawatu Standard, Volume XLVI, Issue 24, 28 December 1925, Page 6

Manawatu Evening Standard. MONDAY, DEC. 28, 1925. THE FARMERS’ UNION.

There was undoubted trouble in the Auckland province amongst the branches of the New Zealand Farmers’ Union over the action of its provincial executive in persisting in the Country Party movement, which ended so disastrously for its promoters on the 4th of November. The farmers of New Zealand have, for many years, been divided in their political allegiance. Some have strongly favoured the Liberal side of politics; others have always consistently supported the Reform Party under the late Mr Massey. Some, again, with a more radical outlook, have favoured the Labour side of politics. For certainly not less than fifteen years, a section of the Auckland provincial farmers have favoured the idea of grouping all the primary producers of the Dominion into one political party, separate and distinct from all existingparties. The apparent hopelessness of the idea does not appear to have occurred to them, although, from the diversity of opinion and outlook, which was evident at the provincial conferences of the union, they might have sensed the impossibility of the task they were desirous of setting the union. Year after year they succeeded in getting remits sent down from their provincial conference to the Dominion conference of the union, and the latter, as invariably and consistently, threw the remits out. Outside of Auckland the Country or Farmers’ Party idea never took root, but the Auckland union with a zeal worthy of a better cause decided to nominate candidates wherever possible, although its decision was met by protests from more than one important branch of the union. Now we notice that Mr R. D. Duxfield, a former provincial president of the Union, has suggested that “the time has arrived when some discipline should be exercised on branches.” Mr Duxfield was one of the Country Party candidates, and in the Raglan election last month, out of 7838 votes recorded, he obtained 222—less than one-third of one per cent, of the votes actually cast bjs the electors of that constituency. Just why he should desire to curb the liberty of the branches controlled by-the Auckland pi'ovincial executive wo canont. pretend to say. But, since in all well-ordered organisations, discipline begins at home, we cannot help thinking Mr Duxfield would do well to remember that he, as a member of the provincial executive, and

those acting 1 with him, have set their branches a very bad example in refusing to abide by the repeated decisions of the Dominion executive, which is responsible for carrying out the decisions of the Dominion conferences, to have nothing to do with the Country Party business. Farmers, as a class, are naturally independent and resist dictation; their mode of living, and the occupation in which they are engaged, naturally make for freedom of action, and, while they may and do, band themselves together for mutual protection and the advocacy of their own immediate interests, they are not so blind to the welfare of others that they fail to recognise the necessity for “a give and take” policy in politics. They are less amenable to and more resentful of “red tape” methods than any other class in the community, and it would be an ill thing for 'the union if its executive officers attempted to interfere with the free expression of opinion on the part of their branch members, or with the right of the latter to approach Ministers of the Crown. For Mr Duxfield or any other member of the Auckland Executive to interfere with them in such directions would simply give" rise to complications which might easily lead to disruption.