Dairy Produce Control

Stratford Evening Post, Volume XXXIX, Issue 92, 23 August 1923, Page 2

Dairy Produce Control

BILL BEFORE THE HOUSE. important alterations. i . . Per Press Association. Wellington, August 22. The Agricultural Committee brought down its report on the Dairy Produce Export Bill in the House today, recommending that the Bill bo allowed to proceed with amendments. It is now provided that nine producers’ representatives shall be elected by the direct vote of the producers. The licensing authority is vested solely in tho Minister, but the control board may still impose conditions regarding contracts. It is also proposed that the board shall not oxe ciso its powers so as to prejudicially affect the sale of produce out of New Zealand if a contract has been entered .into in writing on or before October 1, 1922. The Premier asked the House not to hang the Bill up indefinitely, but to come to a decision one 'vay or the other upon it. The Bill would not be a party measure, but if the House passed it ho would undertake to see that a clause was- inserted in it that the measure would not come into force unfiil a plebiscite of the producers had been taken upon it.

Mr R. Masters (Stratford) said lie wanted to enter a p otest against the manner in which the Bill had been hold up. The Government could not ho sincere in this matter. In the first place, when the committee met it was decided that there should he two days devoted to those who supported it. The committee was desirous of shortening the proceeding.! as much as possible in o der to allow the Bill to come before the House at the earliest moment, but without consulting the oomm'ttee the Miir’ster altered that and decided to take evidence from all and sundry. The result was that already the matter had been held up a considerable time. He wished to draw the attention of the House and the farming coramun ity to the fact that though the report had been presented that afternoon it was ready eight days ago, and now it was brought down when the session was within four days of its conclusion. This was the most important legislation ever brought before the New Zealand Parliament, dealing with what was now the most (important industry in New Zealand The committee had gone to a great deal of trouble and taken a great deal of evidence on the subject. This evidence had been printed, hut it had not been circulated, yet the Government were not treating the matter in a manner which indicated sincerity. The whole thing had been shelved, either to force 'it through in the dying hours of the session, or to shelve it in the hope that some members not of their party would opp >se the Bill and the Government would be able to put on to them the blame for preventing the Bill from going on the Statute Book. It was a wrong thing in principle for the Government to bring down such legisislalinn of a revolutionary character without giving the members of the House an opportunity to go through the evidence, which, he said, had been printed nearly two weeks ago.. The House could not say that the farmers of the country wanted the Bill. Speaking in Taranaki during the election Mr Masfeey said; “Let the farmers ag ee on some form of legislation and the Government would pass the necessary measure.” Could Mr Mssey Say the farmers had agreed on the Bill? He must admit there was strong opposition all over the Dominion by farmers to this Bill, mainly on account of its compulsory clause. He believed tl*|.t if the Government would bring down a measure on the lines of the present'Bill, except that the compulsory clause would be omiitted, they would have no difficulty in getting it through the House. There was no doubt opposition had increased considerably since last year. There was no doubt there were a number of men who were supporting the Bill who were not farmers and who were nothing else than profession;,d chairmen. The secretary of the National Dairy As soefation had said that unless the producers wanted the Bill it would not be forced on them. After further criticism the report was tabled.