'EVADING RESPONSIBILITY’

Poverty Bay Herald, Volume LXI, Issue 18546, 5 November 1934, Page 7

'EVADING RESPONSIBILITY’

DAIRY EXPORTS CRISIS

GOVERNMENT’S POLICY

MR. COLEMAN’S ATTACK

(Parliamentary Reporter.) WELLINGTON, this day. Claiming that the Government simply aimed to hand the conduct of the dairy

export crisis over to a supreme council of three men who would be under no control whatever, and thou to sit back with folded'hands and let the crisis take its course, Mr. D. W. Coleman, Labor member for Gisborne, strongly opposed the main provisions of the Agriculture (Emergency Powers) Bill when that measure was before the House of Representatives last week. The member for Gisborne declared that the Government had already appointed six boards, whose main reason for existtence was to shelter the Government from the demands of the general electorate, and that the appointment of the supreme council would simply add an-, other to the list of ineffective control bodies.

“I represent a district in which there is a very large number of dairyfarmers, and these farmers are very much alarmed and disappointed at the contents of the bill,” stated Mr. Coleman. ‘‘A serious crisis lias arrived in the history of our dairy industry. It did not come upon us yesterday. It was predicted by the Labor Party in 1926-27, and even prior to that. Labor members of Parliament at that time urged upon the Government to legislate to prevent such a crisis, and were laughed at and ridiculed. When the crisis arrives, when through the inaction of the Government half our dairyfarmers are insolvent, the Government sets up a commission to inquire into the position, which everyone else knows. This commission travels about the country and now submits its report.

“PLASTER ON A WOODEN LEG”

‘‘l am.giot going to condemn the report for what it. contains, but for what it omits to mention,” stated Mr. Coleman. ‘‘To me the report is like a plaster on a wooden leg. It will do no harm and certainly no good. W T hat the farmer needs is income, and this bill does not give him a penny piece. It is not much good pointing out to the farmer how he caii produce more, when he is unable to get a price for what he already produces. What on earth is the use of asking a farmer to produce and sell' below the cost of production? The Government, through it@ legislation, has destroyed the purchasing power oi the people, and it now reacts against the farmer, as we on these benches said it would. It seemed as if the increased rate of exchange which limited the Dominion’s purchases of British goods was playing a major part to New Zealand’s disadvantage as sellers in the British market, “I am satisfied that the only .method to save the farmer is Labor’s plan,” he contjnued. “It is worth repeating here : (1) A guaranteed price for butterfat; (2) security of tenure to farmers competently using their land; (3) readjustment of mortgages and land costs on the basis of guaranteed prices; and (4) negotiated agreements with Great Britain and other countries for the marketing of dairy produce, with reciprocal contracts for the importation of goods which cannot be economically produced in the u i Dominion.” HOME B\IYING POWER In his further remarks, Mr Coleman held that it was not sufficient to give substantial assistance to the farmers. Wages and salaries must be restored to a higher level. Our people must be in a position to enjoy the fuller Hie. There was nothing in the bill before the House, he believed, that would help the dairy fariner to reach solvency. “It is quite clear to those who have given any consideration to the subject that at some time or another, a complete readjustment of the relationship between principal and other aspects of the economic life of the dairy industry must take place,’ ’ he stated. “Under present conditions the farmer may invest a substantial sum in his fa-rhi, as well as a life of labor, and lose the lot because of the ‘impropriety’ of reducing the principal of his mortgage. It appears as if a readjustment is inevitable, and would be in the in* , terests of both the mortgagee, and the mortgagor. With a guaranteed price for butter and dairy products, I believe that a readjustment of mortgages and land costs, based on that guaranteed price, is the only way to save the farmer. But that docs not juit this Government. It has been called -a ‘Farmers’ Government,’ but that is not correct; it is a bankers’ Government. Again I state it is income the farmer needs, not regulations.’’

BUFFER FOR THE GOVERNMENT The member for Gisborne took occasion again to refer to the number of boards which the Government has set up to carry out various functions. “I have no faith in these boards appointed by the Governor-General in Council,” Mr Coleman stated “I repeat, it will be an excuse for doing nothing. We have a Railways Board, a buffer between the peoplo and the Government. When the Government is approached, it glibly evades its responsibility by saying: ‘This is a matter for the board,’ and ‘we will place your representations before the board,’ and so nothing is done. The dairy farmers arc in dire circumstances. It is our job—the ,job of Parliament —to do something for them, and to do it now. Not to set up a board and then sit by and fold our arms and say: ‘That’s another difficult job done! ’

“I recognise that control was inevitable,” stated Mr Coleman later. ‘‘That was recognised some years ago, but the Minister of Finance, then the Prime Minister, smashed that control, and is responsible for the plight of the dairy farmers to-day. ”