THE EMERGENCY BILL

Manawatu Standard, Volume LIV, Issue 290, 5 November 1934, Page 2

THE EMERGENCY BILL

VIEWS OF LOCAL MEMBER

Speaking on the Agricultural (Emergency Powers) Bill in the House of Representatives last week, the member for Palmerston (Mr J. A. Nash) expressed the opinion that the Dairy Produce Board, by its attempt to fix prices in the Old Country some years ago, caused the merchants there who had been handling Now Zealand butter for many years to purchase their supplies elsewhere and to invest their money in other countries, and the then Prime Minister, when lie went Home, saw at once the great harm that was being done to tile Dominion. It was true that a communication was sent to New Zealand which resulted in the Dairy Produce Board altering its tactics. The butter at that time had been stored and not sold. The ruling price had been as high as 180 s per cwt. As a compromise at the finish, about half of the butter was liberated and sold at 138 s. Then, within a week from that time the price of New Zealand butter was fixed at 150 s. But the damage had been done; the money had been invested in other countries, and butter.from other countries was being sold in Britain. This position arose simply because these firms, which had been dealing with New Zealand for so many years, naturally were not going to be dictated to by the board. “I have had a good deal of experience with those firms, and 1 think 1 can safely say that the average run of butter companies m New Zealand will be prepared to admit that the firms concerned have always given the dairy farmer of New Zealand a fair spin’,” Mr Nash added. “As far as the Dairy Industry Commission’s report is concerned, I think that it lias been well received right throughout the country. L consider it is a very valuable document. It has dealt with practically all phases of the industry. Most of the speakers so far have criticised the Bill. Those who approve of it are more silent than those who have complaints to make about it. What is the alternative? I speak with some knowledge of the industry, as chairman of directors of a co-operative company - and I feel that the question to-day is just this: Are we prepared to leave things as they are, allowing the Dairy Board and other boards to carry on, to leave the various boards to work separately without any co-ordination ? If wo are not content to leave things _as they are at present and this Bill is to be criticised and condemned, what is to he the - alternative? In the face of the facts as they are known to us and in tlie face of tho very valuable report that, has been presented, I say definitely that we canont refuse to act. We must do something. Exception is being taken to the proposed Executive Commission of Agriculture, consisting of three members. They have been called ‘the big three, 1 ‘dictators’ and ‘the new tyranny.’ Such labels and abuse are not likely to get us anywhere but are used merely to condemn the Bill and to frighten those who feel that they should support the measure. That brings me to two clear-cut questions. The first is whether the Government and Parliament are to accept or refuse responsibility for dealing with economic problems in the present crisis. I should say, from the discussion so far, that we do not seem to be altogether clear on this. If we answer in the affirmative wo have to accept the implications of the change, and we have to face the facts, and face them frankly. We are taking on a new and difficult task, one that the Government hitherto has not had to undertake. The second question is whether, if we are prepared to say that the responsibility rests on the Government, the Ministers themselves and tlie existing departments should directly undertake all the work and all of the responsibilities, or are we to set up new bodies and strengthen the producers’ boards? Should we have a more or less independent Executive Commission of Agriculture to work with and through tlie producers’ boards? I say undoubtedly that that should be the position. One can understand people saying that the Minister and the department should be fully and directly responsible. That view can he properly described as favourable to bureaucracy. This Bill, however, proposes to depart from bureaucratic control. The cry of a dictatorship, however,, is merely an attempt to frighten Parliament and the country. The Government remains in control of the position, and Parliament remains in control of the Government. That is the safeguard, and it is the only safeguard we can have. If this Bill is passed into law there is nothing in it that can injure or reduce the rights of any future Parliament. It contains nothing as to making of regulations, for instance, that can give a future Government greater powers than it in fact "would have by virtue of being the Government with a parliamentary majority. COMPARISON OF PRICES.

“Much lias been said about the price of Danish butter, and reference has been made to the big disparity in the price of that butter and ours, namely; 50s a cwt. It is difficult to understand the reason for it, but it must be remembered that Danish butter is sold on the market fresh; it has to be disposed of within seven days from receipt. Our butter, on the other hand, arrives in solid blocks and, on account of its having been frozen, is unspreadable. The outside of the butter is streaky and has a very deep colour, a good deal of which has to be removed when the butter is prepared for sale by the grocer.- Some companies at Home are re-churning the butter, and as a result they are able to get a fairly good quality, which holds its own in competition with other butters. “The member for Stratford suggested that we should give the farmers a subsidy, to be recovered when prices rise. The suggestion, in my opinion, is quite unworkable. What would happen in the case of a man who purchased a farm and carried on during the period of low prices, and then sold his farm? How would the necessary recovery be made? The essential requirements to-day are better quality and better marketing conditions. The Commissioners had placed before them facts and figures relative to a new system of sending our butter home in pats Over 400 tons of these pats have been exported, on the whole of which there has ben a clear gain of £lO a ton To put it another way: Suppose the price for our ordinary butter in London was 70s per cwt; with the exchange added, that would yield Bis 6d in New Zealand. The butter exported in pats realised 105 s. There is also a big market for cheese under the new system, and it is bringing £2l a ton more than the ordinary make. I think the Commissioners might well have made some reference to this aspect of the industry seeing that information relative to it was placed before them. The reports received from Home are most gratifying and some of those interested in the Old Country go so far as to say it will revo utiomse the industry. I regret that the Commission did not mention it in its report, though possibly it had some good reason; but as to anything that can be done to give an additional puce or £lO a ton clear to the farmer foi ins butter and £2l a ton for his cheese, I say that the new process is well worthy of consideration. Not only will

it sell on the British market, but when we come to deal with Eastern countries it will serve us again. Only recently the officers of the present Antarctic Expedition wrote that the butter which they obtained from New Zealand for _ their former trip had opened up in an unsatisfactory condition, but they have obtained butter prepared under the new conditions for their present expedition. “If the proposed executive of three is ob-jected to, 1 would suggest that it might be possible to overcome that objection by providing that the Minister should be the chairman, with a deputy-chairman functioning. The Minister could remain answerable to Parliament on policy matters, while sufficient independence could be given to the statutory Commission. An arrangement of that kind might give a useful and workable connection between the Minister, the Commission, and the department. I make that suggestion for what it may be worth. It may be one way of getting over the present difficulty. “The Bill is a very good one, and I am prepared to support it. It is designed first of all to deal with marketing and production. After all, these things represent the whole problem. Marketing governs production, and more adequate organisation- to improve marketing is essential. Therefore, the Commission set up under the Bill will be able to make its investigations, and we hope that it will be able to find new markets for our surplus products. There has been a good deal said in this debate about quotas. When the suggestion was first made some time ago there was ail uprising against it, everyone was objecting to it but I do not think it matters what our opinion is. Knowing the position in the Old Country, and what is being done at Home with regard to agriculture I think that we have to face quotas and be prepared to meet them. It can be said of rlns Bill that it does provide effective machinery for dealing with an ever-changing problem.