“DAIRY DISRUPTERS”

Te Awamutu Courier, Volume 68, Issue 5941, 10 May 1944, Page 3

“DAIRY DISRUPTERS”

ALLEGATIONS BY'COMMUNIST PAPER REPLY BY MR A. J. SINCLAIR The People’s Voice, published in Auckland, makes the following remarks in its issue of 3rd May:— “ That certain reactionary elements are prepared to be patriotic only if a good price is paid is becomV*g increasingly evident in connec- \ ion with discussions on the new price for butter-fat. “ Mr A. J. Sinclair, secretary-man-ager of Te Awamutu Co-operative Dairy Company Limited, certainly did his best to create trouble at last week’s ward meeting of the Dairy Board which took place at Te Awamutu. “ Fortunately, his attempts to organise discontent in the farming community were opposed, and to some degree defeated, owing to the patriotic attitude taken by Mr W. E. X, Hale, chairman of the New Zealand Dairy Board. “Mr Sinclair moved the rejection of a remit from the Tatua Co-opera-tive Dairy Company which read as follows: ‘That the dairy companies in New Zealand be requested to bring to the notice of each individual supplier the urgent need for maximum production of butter, cheese, and meat for Britain, and by encouragement or, if necessary, by giving financial assistance, ensure that every possible pound of vitally necessary food we are able to produdce be made available for export during the war period.” “Mr Sinclair’s attempt to defeat this very fine remit w r as defeated, largely owing to the firm stand taken by Mr Hale. •“ Mr Sinclair is well known as a bitter opponent of the Government. More than this, he is an opponent of the Farmers’ Union, and supports the recently-formed break-away organisation which commenced operations in the Waikato. Political Axes to Grind “ Some months ago Mr Sinclair strongly attacked Captain Rushworth, president of the Auckland branch of the Farmers’ Union, and it is well known that he objects to the Union because it is not willing to carry out . the reactionary policies favoured by him. “ The new price for butter-fat is being made the occasion for a vindictive campaign against the Government. The inspiration for this does not come from the ordinary working farmer, but from individuals such as Mr Sinclair and from politicians with an axe to grind. “ Farmers have a right to demand a higher price for their produce. There may be a good case for a higher price, as there is a case for higher wages. But decisions have been made after due consideration. The question of stabilisation is a fac--1 tor which cannot be overlooked. A further rise in price may be desirable in some ways; yet, if granted, it might tend to upset the whole equilibrium of the stabilisation scheme. | Prices and inflation “ If inflation were to set in through a further rise in produce prices wages would certainly follow suit, and the farmers would find themselves worse off than before. “All this is known to those who are fomenting trouble at the present time; but their motives are political and are concerned with matters other than the granting of a better price to farmers. “ The most encouraging feature of the present situation is that many responsible leaders of the farming community refuse to be drawn into irresponsible and unpatriotic intrigue.”

MR SINCLAIR’S COMMENT

When the above article was referred w to Mr A. J. Sinclair, secretary-man-ager of te Awamutu Co-operative Dairy Company Limited, he said that such comments from a Communist journal like The People’s Voice, or a Labour organ like the Standard, always made him feel that he was doing a good job of work for the dairy farmer. “ The only comment I desire to make,” added Mr Sinclair, “is that I did not oppose the remit from the Tatua Dairy Company. Before that remit came up I suggested that a resolution passed two days earlier by the North Auckland conference should be endorsed. This covered exactly the same ground as the remit from the Tatua Company, but was much fuller in its terms. The other delegates, however, preferred the shorter remit, and I withdrew my suggestion.” f Farmers* Union Mr Sinclair said he had no recol- < lection of attacking Captain Rushworth, of the Farmers’ Union, but he remembered very distinctly replying to an attack made upon him by officials of the Auckland Provincial Executive of the Farmers’ Union because he had had the temerity to ask for an additional Id per lb butter-fat as a contribution to the dairy farmer’s increased costs—a claim which was later conceded by the Government. “I should like to add,” concluded Mr Sinclair, “that I have no connection whatever with the Dairy Producers’ Association. I have never been in contact with any of the officials of that body, and know nothing whatever about them.” w

Mr Mclntyre, of Morrinsville, who is one of the prime movers in the formation of the Dairy Producers’ Association, informed the Courier by telephone this morning that Mr A. J. Sinclair was not in any way associated with the Dairy Producers’ Association nor was Te Awamutu Co-operative Dairy Company Limited.