Manawatu Evening Standard. MONDAY, NOV. 12, 1934. THE AGRICULTURAL BILL.

Manawatu Standard, Volume LIV, Issue 296, 12 November 1934, Page 6

Manawatu Evening Standard. MONDAY, NOV. 12, 1934. THE AGRICULTURAL BILL.

The most important of the amendments made to the Agricultural Bill, which was passed on the eve of Parliament adjourning, concerns the constitution of the Executive Commission of Agriculture. In the original Bill the Government proposed a council of three members who were to be invested with the widest possible powers, legislating by Urders-in-Council which, it was provided, should be referred to Parliament for its endorsement. The proposal met with strong opposition, chiefly for fear of the consequences of the socialisation of the industry. The Government has to some extent met those objections by including the Minister of Agriculture as an ex officio member of the Commission and its chairman. He will, no doubt, be unable to take a very active part in its work, but his presence at the meetings of the Commission provides an important link with the Government and Parliament, and the amendment appears to have satisfied the members who were apprehensive of the effects of the original clause. There is an analogy between the Unemployment Board and the Commission in this respect, the de-puty-chairman of the former Board being required to perform a more active role than the Minister who is chairman. The three members of the Commission, apart from the Minister, will hold office for five years, and two of them must have had an active connection with some branch of primary production, or else in the marketing of produce. A great deal will depend upon the personnel of the Commission, and the Government will be required to make a wise choice, for there is no diminution of the extensive power, as originally proposed, for the Commission to make regulations for the better government of primary industries affected by the Bill. These are I’estricted to those now the subject of control by boards. Other amendments provide that con sultation must precede any action by the Commission in taking over the powers of a Board, the Government having the right to decide where the Commission and the Board are unable to agree. While the Government will no doubt be most favourable to its own Commission, the alteration has somewhat limited the power formerly proposed. The promise of a vigorous debate in the Committee stage of the Bill was not sustained, members possibly being relieved that the adjournment was at hand and satisfied with the amendments. The Government has promised that should further amendments be required they can be made next year when the session is resumed. In the meantime the wide dictatorial powers remain, and in spite of Parliament being required to give its approval to Orders-in-Council made by the Commission much may be done before this opportunity arises, making it virtually impossible,' without creating chaos, to rescind an order that may not be considered essential in the country’s interest.