The Southland Times PUBLISHED EVERY MORNING. Luceo Non Uro. SATURDAY, SEPTEMBER 16, 1911. BUDGET PROPOSALS FOR FARMERS.

Southland Times, Issue 16840, 16 September 1911, Page 5

The Southland Times PUBLISHED EVERY MORNING. Luceo Non Uro. SATURDAY, SEPTEMBER 16, 1911. BUDGET PROPOSALS FOR FARMERS.

In some respects this year’s Budget Is of especial interest to farmers, and last Saturday these proposals were the common topic of discussion among country visitors to Invercargill. One point that did not escape remark was the silence of the Budget with respect to the Government's land policy. There is no indication whatever in the Financial Statement that the Government intends to go to the country in November with a clearly defined land policy. Its position in regard to this question is still as vague and uncertain as it has been for years past, and it cannot be denied that when Opposition members, in the course of their speeches on the Statement, twit the Government with having no land policy they find a vulnerable mark. The Government’s record on the land question is one of extraordinary vaccilation. Colours have been nailed to the mast only to be torn down, and backs have been “braced against doors” only to be withdrawn hastily at the first sign of difficulty. Now the position of the Government appears to be one of assumed indifference towards the form of tenure. The Attorney - General dismisses tenure lightly by saying that it is of no importance, provided that the land is rapidly settled. The statement is dutifully repeated by the Government’s henchmen. For instance, Mr G. W. Russell, member for Avon, who is by way of being something of a Radical, forgets that he stoutly championed the leasehold so recently as July last, and now repeats the easy evasion that the form of tenure is of no consequence provided that the land is settled quickly. If these statements represent the attitude of the Government then we may suppose that they are preliminary to a promise that if the people of the country want the freehold they will have it, on condition that aggregation is prevented, and that the endowments are not tampered with. The Government virtually denies that there is any land question, and so the Budget is silent on the point. Farmers naturally contrast this indecision with the clear cut proposals embodied by Mr Massey in the Opposition platform as stated at Wellington in July. In the Budget, however, several schemes are outlined which promise to be of substantial assistance to those engaged in the rural industries. For many years there has been a strong demand from South Island farmers that the experimental work of the Agricultural Department should be extended to this Island. Speaking to farmers at the Dunedin Winter Show, the Hon. T. Mackenzie indicated that an experimental farm would shortly be established in the South Island, and the Budget repeats the promise. The farmers of Canterbury are particularly pressing in their representations as to the opening for experimental work in the South Island by the skilled officers of the Department. They point out. that the ravages of the grass grub attain larger proportions every year, and that the need for the discovery of a remedy is urgent. In general, conditions of climate and soil in the South are so different from those in the North that the results of experiments made in one island have no application to the other. It is therefore necessary that experimental work should be extended not only to the South Island, but if possible to each district. An experimental farm in Southland would be of great assistance to the farmers of this district. Of especial interest are the proposals dealing with co-operative banks and family settlements. We are sorry ic see that a farmer’s representative has sought to cast ridicule on the cooperative bank proposal. The experience of other countries has shown that the scheme is thoroughly sound, and that it is capable of conferring large benefits upon the farming community. Not much is known about co-operative banks in New Zealand, but the fact that there are 12,000 banks of the kind In Germany, and that 950 of one type keep no less a sum than £ 100,000,000 in

circulation speaks for itself. Farmers know that the only security which is of any value under the present hanking system is the security of broad acres, and when they understand that character, industry, and skill will be taken into account by the co-operative banks they will realise the possibilities of these institutions. Cautious management and careful discrimination are necessary, but given these factors the co-operative banks should be a success, and should prove an effective aid in land settlement. There are also large possibilities before the scheme for promoting land settlement by inducing families in association to take up land. The inducement is the prosecution of public works in conjunction with land settlement. The settlers will be guaranteed employment on roads and railways for a certain number of days in each week, so that they will be enabled to live until such time as their farms are sufficiently developed to maintain them. We see no reason why these schemes should be condemned as chimerical or as of no practical value. Their success will depend almost entirely upon administration, but given good administration they should make land more accessible to people of small means and ease the struggle of those who venture into the backblocks. At all events any proposal which has these objects deserves sympathetic consideration, and the details of the scheme will be awaited with interest by farmers In all parts of the Dominion.