BRITISH AGRICULTURE

Otago Daily Times, Issue 20288, 22 December 1927, Page 11

BRITISH AGRICULTURE

A STATE OF DEPRESSION. BOLD MEASURE ESSENTIAL. LIBERAL PARTY’S MOTION. (Press Association—By Telegraph—Copyright.) LONDON, December 20. (Received Dec. 21, at 5.5' p.m.) Sir A, H. Sinclair, in he House of Commons, in submitting the Liberal Party’s motion deploring the Government’s failure to restore agriculture, expressed the opinion that Sir Charles Ble disloe (Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Agriculture) was suffering from 1 ’ paralysis and the insidious disease of complacency. Britain had reached the smallest arable area in its agricultural history, with 400,000 fewer land workers than half a century ago. Temporary as sistance here and there was useless. Bold, comprehensive measures were essential The sugar beet subsidy was the only branch in the Government’s policy which was pursued with vigour, but the £10,000,000 devoted to that purpose might have changed the face of the country if the Government had devoted £5,000,000 to land settlement, £2,000,000 to scientific research, and £3,000,000 to advances. The best results from land necessitated small holdings. There were 10,000 unsatisfied applicants for land in Scotland and 16,000 in England, but the Government slowed down on small holdings. They were not fulfilling their pledges to ex-servicemen, and were floating recommendations of their own tribunal. At present the greatest difficulty in agriculture was the shortage of capital, which was needed for the adaptation of land drainages and reclamation. Sir T. Davies moved the following amendment:—‘‘Recognising that the depression is not removable, the Government should take action on sound economic principles.” Major C. M. M. Price, seconding the amendment, said that the Liberal recommendations amounted to nationalisation. Mr N. E. Buxton said that Labour strongly supported the Liberal motion, and expressed the opinion that tho farmer would be happier under State ownership. Mr Walter Guiness (Minister of Agriculture), replying, said that the Opposition’s propositions were impracticable. He did not agree with the misleading generalisation that there was on a large scale waste and under-cultivation m Britain. Our agricultural wastes and yields compared favourably with those ot other countries. He was not prepared to argue on the efficiency of protection. The Liberals proposed to sweep away landlords, and Labour’s estimate of the cost of nationalisation was £740,000,000. The Government believed that the root of the trouble was the fall in prices, which was beyond control.

Mr Lloyd George said that he was in favour of the-State assisting agriculture: It was impossible to extricate agriculture from its present position without a grant He regretted that Mr Baldwin had not called a conference of all the parties to consider the problems of agriculture. There should be financial assistance for farmers for drainage and to secure cheaper transport for agriculture, and agriculture would have to be emancipated from the middleman.

Mr Lloyd George was subjected to considerable Conservative interruption, recalling his attacks upon the landlords, when he called rural landlords rapacious.

The Liberal motion was defeated bv 258 votes to 107

In reply to a question, Mr Churchill said that the cost of pensions to all workers aged 60, in order to remove them from industry, would be serious. On the basis of oOs weekly it would cost £350,000.000 for the first year, .rising to £600,000,000 in 1960. He did not favour a committee inquiry into the scheme.—A. and N.Z and Sydney Sun Cable.