THE NEW CONTROL.

Manawatu Standard, Volume LIV, Issue 288, 2 November 1934, Page 8

THE NEW CONTROL.

IN FARMING INDUSTRY.

SUPPORT FOR THE BILL.

(By Telegraph.—Special to Standard.) WELLINGTON, Nov. 1. Speaking on the second reading of the Agricultural (Emergency Powers) BUI in the House to-night, the member for Palmerston - (Mr .J. A. Nash) said the question Parliament was bound to face was whether it was prepared to leave things alone and allow the produce boards to carry on separately, or whether their operations should be co-ordinated. He contended that m the face of the valuable matter in the Dairy Industry Commission’s report Parliament could not refuse to act. Exception was taken to the proposed Executive Commission ; they were called dictators and the Commission was supposed to be a new tyranny. Abuse like this would not get them anywhere ; it was intended to frighten those who felt they should support the Bill. Could the Government refuse to take the responsibility in a crisis? It appeared from the discussion that some members would not frankly face the facts. The Government must accept the responsibility and it had set up a new body to strengthen the existing organisations to improve marketing The Bill proposed to get away from bureaucratic control and the cry of a dictatorship was an attempt to frighten the democracy. The Commission could not take the farmers from the produce boards and the Government remained in control of the position, while Parliament remained in control of the Government.

It might be possible to overcome objections to tlic present constitution of ithe Executive Commission by providing that a Minister be chairman and have a deputy-cliairman functioning Mr Nash added. Thus the chairman would be answerable to Parliament for policy matters. The Commission would have sufficient independence to make an arrangement of this kind workable while giving a useful workable connection between the Minister and the department. However, there was so much urgency in the position and conditions had so much changed that action was needed, and he was prepared say that the Bill as framed should go through and ought to be put through by the Government.

Mr Nash expressed surprise that the Commission had failed to make some recommendations regarding the new process of- packing butter which had been demonstrated as a success in the export market. It had added £lO a ton to the price realised for butter, and 400 tons had been sent Home under these conditions, while the enhanced price for cheese with the same process equalled £2l a ton. Surely a process producing so much more value should have been considered worthy of comment by the Commission, which had had full details submitted to it regarding the method and the result. His own opinion was that it would eventually revolutionise the dairying industry. LEANING OF PARLIAMENT. One of the Government members having doubts about the wisdom of passing the Bill with an Executive Commission of Agriculture remaining in it, is Mr W. J. Broadfoot, who declared in the House to-night: “I do not like that part of the Bill which places in the hands of three unknown men powers which I think are too wide. “I don’t see any ‘super-men’ in this country,” he continued, “but we are _ giving Mussolini powers without having men of. the Mussolini capacity, and after is said and done I do not think the British people will ever submit to tactics of that nature.” Mr Broadfoot cordially agreed with several speakeis who had pointed out how dangerous it was to invest the proposed wide powers in three unknown men. The supreme power should be Parliament s, and he suggested that the Government might ultimately follow the Australian method of appointing three Ministers to be the co-ordinating factor between the various produce boards. They could, he considered, act just as energetically as any executive commission. They would be answerable to Parliament and subject to criticism, while •c t €nure would not be five years: if their work did not meet with approval the people would have their remedy. Mr -Broadfoot also showed concern over the growing tendency to come to the Government for aid. With the sheep tanners, Dairy and Meat Boards, boot manufacturers,, manure manufacturers and others coming to Parliament he was wondering what would be the next inaustry to lay its troubles on the steps of the House. If the process developed there would be such a collection of crying children on the steps that the country would have to take a hold somewhere.