BILL TO GO THROUGH

Manawatu Standard, Volume LIV, Issue 281, 26 October 1934, Page 7

BILL TO GO THROUGH

GOVERNMENT’S DETERMINATION. DAIRY INDUSTRY LEGISLATION. (By Telegraph—Special to Standard.) WELLINGTON, Oct. 25. Determination to put through the Agricultural Emergency Powers Bill this session was expressed by the Prime Minister (Rt. Hon. G. W. Forbes) when the measure was introduced in the House to-night. Twentytour members voted against the motion, which was carried, that its first stage be regarded as urgent. The second reading will be taken on Tuesday. “Is it the intention of the Government to sledge-hammer the Bill through?” asked the Leader of the Opposition (Mr M. J. Savage), while Mr A. M. Samuel declared there was apprehension among the dairy producers that such far-reaching legislation was to be pushed through without giving them a chance to consider it. “We should adopt fair-play methods,” he urged as a preliminary to criticism of some of the proposals. “This Government has never flogged legislation through,” retorted the Prime Minister, amid laughter. “This Bill is urgent and the whole purpose is to deal with the marketing of our products overseas. We are one of the world’s best producers but one of the world’s worst marketers. If we did not pass this legislation we would be condemned from one end of the country to the other, and it is the intention of the Government to put this empowering Bill through.” Mr W. J. Jordan: Will it operate this year? Mr Forbes replied that its provisions would operate as soon as authority was given, and the position, he emphasised, would not brook delay. As for allowing time for long discussions, members, he considered, were thoroughly conversant with the needs of the dairying industry and surely Parliament could deal with the organisation necessary to improve our marketing methods. Everyone fl?-ust agree that the dairy farmers did well their job of producing some of the finest produce, which was slaughtered in the world’s market. The Government had been criticised and _ the people asked what they were doing. Mr W. E. Parry: Nothing. The Prime Minister: They will do nothing if you can prevent it, but the Government will do its best to improve the conditions of marketing and find new openings for our produce.

Mr J. A. Lee, describing the Prime Minister as the world’s worst humorist, ridiculed what he called the Government’s sudden realisation that the industry required something to be done for it when the dairy farmers had been in distress for six years. Members: No.

Mr Lee: Now it is coming up for the last time. The Government says, “Let us give it a lesson how to swim.” He declared that the Bill was the result of a caucus resolution that the Government must do something, but how much confidence could the House have in the proposals when it was the Minister of Finance himself who had submarined efforts for orderly marketing. Rt. Hon. J. G. Coates: Why blame the Minister of Finance?

Mr Lee: Saving the dairy farmer by Betting up another board. Mr C. A. Wilkinson deprecated Mr Lee’s attempt to deal with a serious subject in a spirit of levity. The dairy farmers’ troubles, he considered, centred around the question of finance, and if the Bill failed to deal with this subject it was not what he would like to see. If it was possible to give the dairy farmers an opportunity of making representations this should be done, but to condemn the Government for doing something would not meet the position. “I hope the dairy industry is not going to be turned into a political chopping block,” remarked Mr W. J. Poison, “because the situation is too serious and tragic for anything of the kind.” The only complaint he had to make about the legislation was that it looked like locking the stable door after the horse had gone. Mr A. J. Stallworthy: A cow this time.

VIEWS OF FARMERS’ PRESIDENT.

Mr Poison declared the proposals for organising the industry and improving marketing were valuable and helpful, but as the representative of a closely settled dairying district he knew that what the dairy farmer wanted was immediate relief in the way of finance, and this could be given if the Government had the courage to tackle it. He had received a resolution from not only northern but southern farmers appealing for an opportunity of considering the legislation. Mr Coates: The resolutions were inspired. What organisation was unanimous P Mr Poison: The executive of the Otago Farmers’ Union. Mr D. MacDougall: And the dairymen of Southland. (Laughter.) Mr Coates: We don’t legislate by telegram. Let us understand the position. We are going to put this legislation through. Mr Stallworthy accused the Government of pretending to be the big strong man who would slog the Bill through Parliament. The Bill proposed to conscript the dairy farmers of New Zealand. Mr P. Fraser, who was also very highly critical, declared the reason for the failure of the Dairy Board was that it was hamstrung. The Dairy Commission report simply enabled readers to know the disease and why it had died, but.not the remedy. How, he asked, would effective marketing get over the British Government imposing a quota on New Zealand ? The Minister of Agriculture declared the Bill contained much which the dairy industry had wanted for yeans. The industry had always asked for the election not to be on the existing basis, but the present system was a compromise on the fallacy of one man, one vote. The dairy farmer considered in this respect that he had never had a fair spin, and it was proposed to give him what he wanted —an election through the dairy factories on a tonnage basis. The Opposition must recognise that the greater the financial interest of the Government in the industry the greater the necessity for its representation on the control bodies. The Bill gave the Dairy Board powers which had been asked for by the National Dairy Conference. It was nonsense to say nothing had been done for the dairy farmer. There was the statutory reduction of interest and the high exchange, and now there was authority to enable the dairy farmer to got out of liis difficutties in a manner he otherwise could not attempt. Other proposals would be submitted by the Minister of Finance which would meet his immediate problem. The proposals for improvement in the industry had been before it 12 months and last June a representative conference had considered both subsidy and guaranteed price

proposals and turned down the guarPoison: They asked for a subSl< M r Macmillan: They asked for a loan and they asked-for this Dairy Commission. ~ The Minister added that as the regulations giving power to these now bodies had to be submitted to Parliament it was open to the House to review ’ them. If the Bill was put through this session it would take possibly until the beginning of next session to put the proposals into operatloMr Samuel: Where will the dairy farmer be then? The Minister: In the position of knowing he is getting what he asked for.