Stratford Evening Post With which is Incorporated "THE EGMONT SETTLER" Established 1890. FRIDAY, FEBRUARY 13, 1931. WHAT WERE THE CONTRADICTORY RESOLUTIONS?

Stratford Evening Post, Volume I, Issue 56, 13 February 1931, Page 4

Stratford Evening Post With which is Incorporated "THE EGMONT SETTLER" Established 1890. FRIDAY, FEBRUARY 13, 1931. WHAT WERE THE CONTRADICTORY RESOLUTIONS?

IT would be rather interesting to know just what resolutions passed at the Farmers' Rally at Hawera in December are unpalatable to the Stratford Chamber of Commerce, as the remarks on the subject made by the president at Tuesday night's meeting are somewhat surprising. In explaining the reasons why he did not attend the rally he said: "He had seen two of the resolutions previous to the meeting. One called for equal opportunity for the farmer. That was what the speaker wanted to see; but the other resolution he saw called for special advantages for the farmer. The promoters of the conference wanted to blow hot and cold. The resolutions were not open to discussion; and if they had been carried and he had been present he would have been associated with them."

In having two of the resolutions submitted to him before the conference Mr. Richards was more fortunate than most other people, for even the Press were not provided with copies of these until they were handed around at the meeting. But in any case it is rather remarkable how any motion passed at the conference can be taken to imply a demand for* preferential treatment for farmers. A perusal of the motions passed at the meeting should make this clear, and so that this may be done a summary is given below. There were nine resolutions, these being:— 1. A request for compulsory conciliation and optional arbitration. 2. A request for cessation of railway construction works and the placing of the railways under a non-political board. 3. A protest against the payment of 14s a day to men on relief works. 4. A desire for reduction in Customs taxation to bring about lower costs of production and living. 5. A demand for a drastic cut in administration costs and Government expenditure. 6. Urging that the Government be consistent and give backing to short-term as well as long-term bonds in connection with finances for farmers. 7. Advocating derating of farm lands, the majority of those present at the meeting holding that rating for roading purposes was no longer a fair burden upon the primary producer, in as much as the roads now carried national traffic in competition with the railways. 8. A pledge to stand behind the leaders of the Farmers' Union and Parliamentary candidates prepared to work for equal opportunity for the farmer.

The final resolution was a vote of thanks to the President of the Union.

While a lack of time did not permit of long and numerous speeches the Press reports do not indicate that discussion on the resolutions was forbidden. As a matter of fact an amendment was moved to resolution No. 7 and was put to the meeting, but was lost. There has been very little criticism of the meeting except From politicians with strong party leanings, and as the country is getting tired of party politics little attention has been paid to such folk. It is indeed surprising (bat the Chamber of Commerce, representing business interests in a town dependent for its existence on the primary producers, should be unable to associate itself with the movement. Presumably the Chamber agrees with the President. After reading the above resolutions one must ! • pardoned for desiring some further enlightenment as to in what direction the promoters ( (tie conference attempted Id blow hot and cold, and in what way some of the resolutions were contradictory.