Readers Write

Northern Advocate, 20 February 1940, Page 4

Readers Write

As I do not have a copy oi' the balance-sheet of the Hikurangi Dairy Company at hand, and cannot question his figures, I am DAIRYMEN’S prepared to accept PROBLEMS. Mr. Rusk’s statement that the price of butterfat did not jump up to 2/6 the season after it was down to 9d, but that does not alter the fact that there was a range of from 9d to 2/6 as stated by me. I quoted the figures to show that | the prices of butterfat from 1914 till the issue of the Dairy IndustryCommission’s report in 1934-35 were anything but stable, and the farmer never knew what he Would receive I from one month to the other, whereas the price we receive now is guaranteed by the Government. This year it is guaranteed for two seasons. The farmer is thus removed from a state of nightmare to one of security. It is true I urge the farmer to ac- | cept, at least on account, the subsidy of 75 per cent on labour where jit will tend to increase production. This is a war measure to get the production the Empire is in dire need of. Surely it is our duty to respond wherever we can. I honestly believe a subsidy will get bigger results than any rise in price coud give, because the money woud go where it was needed most and leave permanent improvement to the land. On the other hand, much of the money would go into the pockets of uneconomic farm owners, who would not use it to give further production. In answer to Mr Rusk as to whom the Government is going to rob to pay us the subsidy, I know of no one, but, on the other hand, I know a lot of people the Government are helping. Of course, the Government are putting the brake on the profiteer, and, my, isn’t he squealing. And, sure, some farmers are squealing for him, too. The Price Fixation Committee was brought in to prevent undue rise in costs, or huge war profits, as was done in the last war, not, as Mr Rusk seeks to think —regulate prices that were in force 10 years before their advent. Anyway, why vent spite on the little potato grower, who really did get into a land of scarcity for a wee while. Next year this wee chap may strike a blight, or a glutted market. He is in the position we dairymen were in, when Rafferty rules prevailed. He has no guaranteed price yet. It is the sugar kings and such fry we want to keep our lamps trained on. It is men of that kind who were getting a rake off of 31 per cent, and said they wanted more or they would go bankrupt. Yes, it is such people who are sending us their paper free and filling our homes with their propaganda, at the same time telling us what fine fellows we are. and letting us know on the quiet how badly the Government is treating us. The Government’s appeal to the farmer to save more heifers was not belated; it is a wartime appeal, and was sent out just about the time when' war was declared. I say again, it is up to the Government to assist the farmer who has answered this call, and help him. if he needs it, to provide pasture for those heifers as they come to profit. Mr Rusk appears to think the burden of costs and longer hours is too great for the farmer to comply with the Govcrnnient'S; appeal tfok more production. Mr Nash has promised to review costs for war production if he can be shown that they bear heavily on production.

I agree with Mr Rusk when he says it is criminal for men to go on strike at a time like this, while every man is wanted in the best job he is suited to do. I believe it is just as criminal for the primary producer, who can, but won’t, try to increase production. I don’t think there are many of us who will not do our best.—JOHN McBREEN (Marua).