"NOT ASSISTING"

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXXVIII, Issue 23996, 20 June 1941, Page 5

"NOT ASSISTING"

FARMERS' ATTITUDE

CRITICISM BY THE BOARD

FAIR TREATMENT CLAIMED

Criticism that the farming community was not assisting the board by helping men to be released for war service was made by -Mr. C. R. Orr Walker, chairman, and Mr. A. M. Samuel, a member, at yesterday's sitting of the No. 1 Armed Forces Appeal Hoard. Mr. Samuel criticised attn/ks made on the board by members of the industry and referred particularly to one by Mr. A. E. Robinson, secretary of the Auckland provincial executive of the Farmers' Union.

In the last war members of the farming industry were most helpful by organising, conferring and giving personal supervision to release men for the front, said Mr. Orr Walker. The attitude of the industry now was to see that no one was taken off the farms. "If you study the number of appeals by farmers you will find they have noon very generously treated by the board," said Sir. Samuel. "We know the value of farmers and farms to the community and we know whether or not a man can be spared. We realise that the farming community have a duty to the State as-well as others, and we are not going to exempt every man simply because ho is a farmer.

' I quite agree with the chairman that we are getting very little assistance from the farmers," continued Mr Samuel. "Attacks have been made on the board by responsible members of the farming community, one attacking it on its dealings with farmers who had appealed. This was signed by Mr. A. E. ltobinson, secretary of the Farmers' Union, who publicly attacked the board. It happened very soon after a case had hocn heard by the board in which the appellant was represented by another prominent member of the Farmers' Union, and in which the appeal was dismissed. "We do not like it," said Mr. Samuel. "We were appointed by the Government as a judicial body to see that the war effort is helped from every angle. We have an important duty and so have the farmers, and we do not want to be dictated to by anyone outside. We know our job and 1 trust we do it fairly." DENIAL OF ALLEGATION CO-OPERATION FREELY OFFERED The statement of the chairman of the No. 1 Armed Forces Appeal Hoard, Mr. C. R. Orr Walker. S.M., that the farming community was not assisting the board was criticised bv Mr. R. C. Clark, chairman of the Auckland District Council of Primary Production, last night. Mr. Clark said: "I am annoyed at the statement of the chairman that the farming community was not giving the assistance it should in arranging tor the release of men for military service. My council was requested by the director of national service to offer its co-operation to the appeal board with a view to smoothing out any difficulties that might arise, and working out a policy to maintain production and the structure of the farming community. "To our surprise the appeal board refused to meet either the council or its chairman. Co-operation is taking place with excellent results in other areas, notably the Waikato, but Mr. Orr Walker stated that he saw nothing that warranted a meeting. Evidently he has now changed his opinion. No section of the community is more prepared than the farmers to carry its share of any national effort." COMPETING CLAIMS PRODUCTION AND MANPOWER (0.C.) PALMERSTOX NORTH, Thursday A reservist appealing before the No. 3 Armed Forces Appeal Hoard was told bv the chairman. Mr A. Coleman, S.M.. that the fact that he might have to sell up his stud flock of Romney sheep to serve with the forces did not carry very great weight as ground for an anpeal. "We are laced with competing claims." said the chairman. "Om is the maintenance of production and the other maintenance of adequate manpower oversea.-,. So far as production is concerned, more pressing claims are for cheese and wool. A stud flock, talcing a long view, means improvement for flocks, but there are scores of men in the towns who have had to put up the shutters and get right out."