The Southland Times. MONDAY, APRIL 10, 1944. Dairy Farmers and Production

Southland Times, Issue 25334, 10 April 1944, Page 4

The Southland Times. MONDAY, APRIL 10, 1944. Dairy Farmers and Production

ON THE EVE of his departure for the London conference the Prime Minister broadcast a statement of special interest to dairy farmers. It was an appeal for increased production, but it was accompanied by guarantees and proposals which may help to make an additional effort practicable. The dairy farmers are not less patriotic' than any other section. Indeed, they have accepted strains and hardships which they have felt increasingly to be disproportionate. When the payment of farm cost allowances was authorized last year, to reimburse the industry for extra costs, the farmers were tied to a pre-war price level. Theoretically, the old price remains unaltered; but cost allowances mean an effectual increase of income. It was generally believed in farming circles that, although the cost agreement was a move in the right direction, it did- not promise sufficient relief. With the best will in the world, farmers could scarcely produce more butterfat under existing conditions. Although the appeal boards relieved many farmers of their military obligations, the labour difficulty remained acute. The supply of fertilizers had been reduced by Japanese action in the phosphate islands, and could not be restored to its former level. Harassed farmers were selling their herds. Moreover, the remaining herds were producing less. The case for better financial returns was therefore based on sheer necessity. A guaranteed price, related in the first place to an estimated production, had been -undermined from twq directions. Wartime conditions within the industry were making it harder for farmers to obtain an adequate labour reward. And simultaneously the higher cost of living was reducing the real value of an income obtained by greater exertions. Critics have tried to prove that the. dairy farmei-s were better off than they claimed to be. But the facts were stated' plainly and convincingly in the annual report of the Dairy Board for the year ended July 31, 1943. “The total butterfat content of butter and cheese manufactured by dairy companies in the Dominion,” said the report, “shows a decrease of 8.3 per cent, as compared with the previous season.” Climatic conditions were unfavourable in Auckland province, but elsewhere they could not be used to explain the lower output. “Heavy culling of dairy cows has taken place, and the increase in the number of bobby calves sent, to freezing works during June and July, 1943, shows that insufficient heifer, calves are being reared to provide replacements.” The board informed the Government that “this very unsatisfactory state of affairs” had been caused partly by the uncertain official attitude towards costs adjustments, and partly by the shortages of labour and fertilizers. Whatever could be said about causes, however, the results were sufficiently plain.

Road to Recovery

’ It now remains to be seen if the Government has found the right remedies quickly enough. The gravest weakness can possibly be removed fairly promptly. If men with farming experience are released from the armed forces, a first and important step will be taken to check the reduction of herds. But the trend must not only be checked; it must be reversed. Apparently dairy farmers are to be prevented f(-om changing to other types of farming, and farmers who have already changed to sheep or dry stock during the past three years “may be required to revert to dairying.” This provision can be justified by the urgency of the situation. Nevertheless, no regulations will be brought down until the question has been discussed with representatives of the industry. The Government is wisely adopting a policy of conciliation. It has long become obvious that farming discontents are neither frivolous nor unreasonable. The farmers are anxious to make their fullest contribution to the war effort; but they have been brought to a mood which requires incentive rather than exhortation. The building up of herds will be encouraged by a subsidy of £1 a head on all heifer calves above five reared by an individual supplier. At the same time the farmer’s income will be increased by a wage cost allowance, and by the removal of an anomalous tax charge on income which normally would be used for essential maintenance costs. Dairy farmers are promised priority in the allocation of fertilizer when additional supplies become available, and a rural housing scheme is to be given the “utmost practicable urgency.” Expert analysis may reveal weaknesses in some of these proposals. But the general trend of the Prime Minister’s statement makes it seem certain that the Government is at last giving full attention to the needs of daily farmers. The proposals go further than anything else which has been attempted since the beginning of the war.. Primary production is not a sectional matter; it is the solid basis of New Zealand’s war effort. It could and should have been strengthened much earlier. Nevertheless, it must be admitted that while, military demands on man-power remained unpredictable the Government could not easily make long-term commitments. The man-power problem has now been clarified. It will remain difficult

until after the war; but with the emphasis shifting from military service to farm service the Government is in a position to shape a bolder policy. The major effort must still be made by the farmers themselves. They are being promised better returns and better conditions, and these will be welcomed. But wartime difficulties are cumulative. The earlier shortages of labour and fertilizer will leave effects that may respond slowly to present or future improvements. Mr Fraser was right, however, in saying that the new proposals “constitute an important development in the Dominion’s war effort.” They bring a production crisis into the open; and they point to remedies which, if applied thoroughly and with goodwill, should set the dairy industry on the road to recovery.