DAIRY COMMISSION.

Manawatu Standard, Volume LIV, Issue 304, 21 November 1934, Page 5

DAIRY COMMISSION.

(To the Editor.) Sir, —There was apparently a lively debate at the recent sitting of the Dairy Farmers’ Parliament when the report of the Dairy Industry Commission came up for consideration. Messrs Boyce, Bond and Norman are to be commended upon the stand they took up at that meeting and the thanks of all dairy farmers are due to them.

The Dairy Commission was set up for the purpose of endeavouring to bring down some recommendations for relief to an industry -which is struggling under conditions (according to the expressed view of the commission itself) “that have assumed the proportions of a national crisis. Farmers buoyed up with hope that some relief would be forthcoming have been cast back once more into the mire of despondency and despair, feeling as they do that instead of the promised relief they are only to be asked to shoulder additional burdens. In approaching this subject one would have expected that the commission’s first object would have been to diagnose the fundamental causes of the depressed condition of the industry. One also would have expected that this part of their enquiry would have filled a goodly portion of the body of their report. It is utterly futile to attempt to propound a remedy if the defect that is causing the trouble is unknown. But this is exactly what our Government is attempting and it is this futile policy that the chairman of the Dairy Farmers’ Union is prepared to support. It appears that the commission (and the Government in following up its recommendations) started its enquiry and so based its remedy on the assumption (1) that the quality of our produce and (2) that the producing efficiency of the industry are the root causes of our .troubles. These are quite obvious absurdities as during the period in which the prices of dairy produce have been falling the farmer has, in Spite of the great odds against him, both improved quality and efficiency of production—the latter in a manner that can only be described as remarkable, and yet it is just this part of the industry that our legislators, wish to tamper with. I do not say we should rest content with present quality and efficiency; there is yet room for much improvement. But I do say leave the producing end alone; it already has achieved wonderful results and will in future achieve still greater results if allowed to develop without Government restriction and other interference. The marketing and distributing side is undoubtedly where to look for the defect. Our actual marketing methods leave room for considerable improvement and an enquiry here would likely produce useful evidence. It is when we come to the distribution, not only of dairy products but of the products of all industry that we arrive at. the crux of the whole matter and this is where the commission and the Government are side-stepping the main issue, and are definitely neglecting their responsibility to the community. All other questions are merely subsidiary and cannot prove effective until this vital problem of the distribution of the products of industry has been solved.

Mr N. Campbell, in the course of the debate at the dairy farmers’ meeting last Thursday, asks : “Are we to progress or retreat and still ' agitate for something which it is impossible to secure?” I say to fellow farmers, reflow Mr Campbell and surely -we shall retreat. I say to Mr Campbell that we are agitating for nothing more nor less than what is our just and perfect right, namely, the food, clothes, shelter and amenities of life, the products

of our combined efforts as a commun-

ity, but which we are unable to obtain owing to the operation of a pernicious financial system. This is not merely a farmers’ affair but one that vitally concerns the whole community whose very existence is at stake. The existing monetary system inverts the facts of our industrial activity. It says we are becoming poorer when in actual fact we are becoming richer and richer as time progresses—our possession of real wealth which consists of goods and services is increasing by leaps and

bounds. The potential demand for these is well night insatiable and yet this demand cannot become effective on account of a chronic short supply of money, which is the distributing channel by which these goods find their way into tlie hands of consumers. It also says we are dependent upon a favourable balance of trade in which w© must export more real wealth than we import. It takes little power of reasoning to understand that this is nothing less than national impoverishment and yet we are told by this means we can become financially richer. It also says wo must, destroy and restrict production, by this means raising prices so we (possibly some of us) become financially richer, while many go in dire want of the very goods destroyed. Again this amounts to national impoverishment. The commission recommends a search for foreign markets, but seems to overlook the fact that owing to the policy of economic nationalism being pursued by most countries of the world foreign markets are fast closing up. _ I _ fear this search will be in vain. Until we i

make up our minds to so reform our monetary system that it reflects the I facts of industrial activity and to have i a just balance of purchasing power with goods for sale we shall obtain no lasting relief from these present dis-1 tressed conditions. All other measures

that may bo adopted are merely palliatives which prolong our agony. In conclusion I would ask Mr Campbell and also those members of the Manawatu and West Coast Dairy Association who support the same view to wrap the west towel round their

heads and start their enquiry into this subject from the following fact and ask themselves the question that follows. The exchange value of New Zealand’s products in Britain is greater now than in 1914, i.e. at present prices one cwt. of New Zealand butter, for instance, buys more English goods than it did then. Added to this, production is vastly greater. There is no excuse whatsoever for a depression in New Zealand. We are, in fact, more prosperous than ever before in the history of the country. Then why this poverty amidst such plenty ? No, Mr Campbell, our agitation is

not for the impossible, but for that which actually exists, staring us all in the face, but as yet too many of us, particularly our leaders, are so blind as to be unable to perceive it. That

a commission of “experts,” set up to deal with a “national crisis,” could, overlook the above facts, and bring down recommendations affecting that part of the dairy industry least needing attention passes one’s understanding.—l am, etc., AVINGS.