PARTY POLITICS

New Zealand Times, Volume XLVII, Issue 10964, 28 July 1921, Page 4

PARTY POLITICS

A LIVELY DEBATE 9. SHOULD THERE BE A PURELY FARMERS’ PARTY? ‘ ‘EORMATION IXADVISABLE.’’ The question of party polities was discussed by the Farmers’ "Union conference yesterday. On the order paper was the following Southland motion:—“That, in order that matters affecting farmers m»tv be intelligently dealt with in Parliament, the time has now arrived when the Farmers* Union, through its members, shall make a stand and determine that only farmers or men with practical knowledge of fanners’ needs shall receive support at Parliamentary elections, and this conference is of opinion that the rules of the New Zealand Farmers’ Union should be altered accordingly.” The next “political** remit was from North Canterbury, as follows:—“That the formation of another political party at the present is inadvisable, but as there are many matters of great importance to the farming community which urgently require attention, the Dominion executive be requested to prepare a statement of our requirements to be presented to the Government and to the members supporting the Government.” When called on to move tills, Mr W. A. Banks secured leave to delete all the words after “inadvisable.” AN “EXTRAORDINARY ARGUMENT.”

Mr Banks said that if this were adapted the farmer®’ platform in his district would fall to pieces. They had almost a® many Liberal and Labour men in their ranks as they had others. The thing to do was to draw up a set of requirements and ask candidates to subscribe to it. * Mr W. W. Mulhollajid (North Canterbury) seconded. He thought that for various reasons it was inadvisable to enter politics. One reason was fear of causing a split. Mr R. D. Dufield (Horotiu) thought that an extraordinary argument. Instead of causing a split it would weld the farmers politically. What wa® the position in 'Australia? Seven or eight farmers were dominating the * whole position. In Canada? The livest man in politics there wa® the leader of the Farmers' Party. Half a dozen strong men in Parliament dependent on the farmers’ vote would be an excellent thing for the men on the land. Mj- F. Mills (Hawera) asked what hope of success a political movement oould have when the farmers would not join the union. At the time of the laist election in his district he had titied to think what the position would be, and lie came to it he conclusion that the result might have been the defeat of the Reform candidate, or of the Libera] candidate, and there would have been such a split as to let in the one candidate they wanted to keep out.

Mr J. G. Anderson (Pelorus) said that in his district the entry of a farmers' party to the field of politics would mean disruption. Mr Hugh Morrison (Masterton) said he would object to being gagged and driven to the poll and told who to vote for. The farmers would do worse than they were doing now if they went in for party politics. “DAMN NUISANCES” AND “DUMB DOGS.” Captain Colbeck (Morrinsville) said he was amused at Mr Lysnar, who said the union should not touch politics. Mr Lysnar: I said party politics! Captain Colbeck (holding up a bunch of remits): Are these party politics? Mr Lysnar: No. Captain, Colbeck: No; they are farmers' politics, and we want a farmers’ party. I have been passing these damn—■— Laughter. Captain Colbeck: I beg your pardon. I have been helping to pass these wretched things for years, and what good have they done. The Labour Party held conferences for years, and they got nowhere. They then hit on going in for politics, and to-day they run the country. What had the Irish Party done in the House of Commons? A delegate: Been a damn nuisance! (Laughter.) Captain Colbeck: Yes; they may have been a damn nuisance from your point of view, but what have they done from their own point of view? They have controlled the show. Captain Colbeck said there had been ; a lot of farmer members in the House of Representatives, but they had been dumb dogs. The chairman (obviously mishearing the speaker): Is that Parliamentary language? / Roars of laughter. Captain Colbeck (carefully explaining) : I said “dumb” dogs. Captain Colbeck said be was a class man, and he was out for his class. Mr D. Jones (Kaiapoi), a member of Parliament, said if some of them were dumb in the House it might he well to say a word here. Mr Lysnar: They breed the dumb dogs only in the Auckland district. Mr Jones said he had heard it said the union wanted what there was in. Australia—nine men ruling Australia. They .wanted, that meant, to do away with democracy. If one stood for Parliament he must he prepared to consider everyone'® point of view. Tfie power of the Labour Party had been mentioned. What had the Labour Party achieved? The Labour Party did not rule Parliament. What was wanted was to get all the farmers into the union, and have a union that could control the Government if necessary. MOTION EASILY CARRIED. Mr C. K. Wilson (Piopio) said the Auckland branches, representing a quarter of the farmers of the Dominion, were wholly in favour qf a farmers' political party. Mr E. Bowman (Gore) said he had to vote for the motion, but personally he was against it. Mr W. B. Mathcson (Eketahuna) drew attention to rule 28*, which, he said, required that the union should, as far as possible, avoid partisan questions. Mr A. E. Harding (Mangawhare) thought the time absolutely ripe for the formation of a farmers* political party. The mover, Air Banks, replying, termed the Aucklanders the “most conservative party—a damned conservative party.” One of the Auckland delegates, though endowed with com-mon-sense, was “cracked on this subject. ” The motion wa® carried by 30 vote® to 7 votes. “WHEN TIME IS OPPORTUNE.” The following Nelson remit wa® carried by 22 votes to 19: —“That, in tho opinion of this oonferenoe, the rules should be amended, so that when the timo is opportune tho union will bo able to take an active part in tho country’s politics.’*