BILL UNDEMOCRATIC

Te Awamutu Courier, Volume 52, Issue 3756, 15 May 1936, Page 7

BILL UNDEMOCRATIC

PRIMARY PRODUCTS MARKETING. MR BROADFOOT’S CRITICISM. (Special to Te Awamutu Courier.) The opinion that the Primary Products Marketing Bill was undemocratic, and that ho was opposed to it was expressed by Mr W. J. Broadfoot (National, Waitomo) in the House of Representatives. Mr Broadfoot said that under the Bill the produce was taken from the producers, and they had no say in its marketing, although they had gone to endless trouble in producing it The Bill was proof positive that the Government considered that the farming community was not capable of running its own business. He maintained that the farmers could run their business from the growing of the grass to the delivery of the produce to the factory, but once their produce was manufactured into the finished product, they were not capable of handling their own affairs. That was an unwarranted attitude for the Government to take up. The farmers were to be divested of their produce under the guise of a guaranteed price, and their produce was to be marketed by people devoid of experience in the marketing world. It was now becoming much easier to produce goods than to sell them and get a reasonable price. There was much skill required in marketing, and he was surprised that the Government’ did not realise that fact. He was confident that, if a plebiscite were taken of the farmers they would have nothing to do with the scheme, but would claim the inherent right to market their own produce. Mr Broadfoot claimed that the dairy farmers had been lulled into the belief that the guaranteed price was a guaranteed minimum price. He wondered whether the delegates to the last dairy conference had been allowed to discuss the principles underlying the measure. He believed that the machinery and details of the scheme were the only aspects open for discussion, and that seemed to be an extraordinary position. One was surprised that a Government that had the confidence of the people and professed to give its confidence to the people should be shy about discussing the principles. They were principles of a revolutionary nature. The legist lation almost smacked of dictatorship. The legislation cunningly took control of the dairy .farmers’ production, and was but one more step to the ad-, mitted goal of the Government—the socialisation of everything in the Dominion. The next step would be the state control of the land, and then the Dominion would revert to the usehpld policy, and he did not think that that policy would be acceptable to the people. Members of the Government side had spoken disparagingly of the budgetary method adopted by the previous Government, but that method was introduced to assist poeple definitely in trouble. The present legislation would inevitably call for further regulations, and eventually a restriction in production. There had been many examples of the fact that where a price was paid above parity people would rush into that industry and production would be intensified. The dairy farmers would get pack a little bit of what they would lose through the legislative programme of the Government but their costs would inevitably increase. Labour rates would have to go up, and every section of the community which dealt with farm produce would have shorter hours and higher wages. If that happened, the guaranteed price would melt altogether, and the farmer woiild find himself in the position that he (would become a producer, and his reward would be a decent standard of living. That would be a levelling down principle, but the level should be raised in every case if it could be done. The Minister of Finance had said that the best houses in Tooley Street would be utilised in marketing, but who was to decide that? Some of those firms had been in business for a century or more, and they had worn channels of trade to the retailers. If hostility were engendered, New Zealand would suffer. It was of the utmost importance to maintain the goodwill of the merchants, retailers, and consuming people in Great Britain.