FARMERS PROTEST

Nelson Evening Mail, Volume LXX, 25 May 1936, Page 2

FARMERS PROTEST

STATE CONTROL OF DAIRY PRODUCE UNDER GUARANTEED PRICES SCHEME REMIT CARRIED BY ONLY ONE VOTE On a close division of 16 to 15 votes the Nelson Provincial Conference of the New "Zealand Farmers’ Union passed a remit protesting against the proposals of the Government to take complete State control of dairy produce under the guaranteed prices scheme.

The remit, from the Riwaka branch, was as follows: “That as the aim of the Farmers’ Union is co-operative control of farm produce, this conference protests against the proposals of the Government to take complete State control of dairy produce in the process of paying guaranteed prices.” Mr O. Wilkinson, in moving the remit, said all the work of the Union in the past would be wasted if the Government was now to take complete charge of the marketing of the produce. It was a national question. The proposal of the Government was the first form of Socialism. Socialism, in his opinion, was a myth, and not possible of being put into operation. If such a measure was allowed the producers would all" become State slaves. A voice: “Aren’t we that now?” Mr L. B. Robinson seconded the motion.

Mr W. B. North said it was useless protesting against something which was now an established fact. The Union should not kick against a brick wall and they should try to make the best of a bad job, if it was a bad job. Mr J. P. Prouse (Wakefield) said the Wakefield branch was opposed to the remit. The Hon. Mr Nash, Minister of Finance, had said the whole of the butter supply would be sold to the Co-operative Wholesalers’ Association who had 5,000,000 members alone, not to mention their families. They alone could consume all New Zealand produced.

Mr J. Martin 9 (Riwaka) said he would oppose the remit. It was better that the Government who guarantee the prices should take over the marketing of it. In the past they had had merchants in England using the supplies for their advantage and not in the interests of the producers. Mr S. O’Hara said he was surprised that Riwaka had brought forward; the remit. There had been no good argument against it. I Mr S. Llewellin asked if the RiI waka branch wanted the guaranteed : price and also to control the sale of the butter? Mr M. Brown (Murchison) said the guaranteed prices would be better than those now received. It appeared wages were going up for employees whether the price was accepted or not, i and so it was advisable to take the increase in price. Several members said the Union' should concentrate in getting the guaranteed price increased. The president (Mr K. J. Holyoake, M.P.) said there had been guaranteed prices ,in the past for the fruit industry, but that industry would object to the Government taking over the sale of the fruit. The remit, he pointed out, referred not to the guaranteed price, but to the State control of the sale of the produce. He said | that investigations had shown that the Co-operative Wholesalers’ Associa- | tion could not handle the New Zea- ‘ land produce, particularly butter, as ' the Association dealt with the poorer j people in Britain who could not af- ! ford to buy at an adequate price. The proposal of the Government was too Socialistic for him. The producers should retain the democratic right to j have a say in the disposal of their products. Guaranteed prices could be operated while retaining the rights jof the producers. The best men to dispose of the produce were those on the present Producers’ Board and this ; would be recognised by the Government which would coopt them in the : State departments so that the same ■ 1 men could continue to sell the Dominion’s produce. Those men would probably be satisfactory, but what would happen in the future when succeeding State officials without practical experience took over the work. The remit was carried by 16 votes to 15.