AGRICULTURE IN BRITAIN

Taranaki Daily News, 31 January 1933, Page 7

AGRICULTURE IN BRITAIN

NEW PARTY ORGANISED.

MR. V. C. REDWOOD’S CAMPAIGN.

London, Dec. 15.

Mr. V. C. Redwood, who is chief organiser of the New Agricultural Party, is using his persuasive powers in many parts of the country to bring the farmers into sympathy with the new party’s principles, which include whole-hearted protection of fopdstuffs. He was recently at Carlisle, where he met on the platform Mr. Wilfred Roberts, who was Liberal candidate for North Cumberland at the general election last year. ■ A lively debate ensued before an assembly of farmers, and the Carlisle Journal, which apparently follows a Freetrade. policy, reported it over five columns of the, newspaper. When the vote came to be taken a large number supported the New Agricultural Party policy of protection, but -a still larger number opposed it, which evidently gave great satisfaction to the Carlisle Journal. The double column headings to the report read: “Verdict For Free Trade; Cumberland Farmers Reject Beaverbrook Policy; Mr. Wilfred Roberts Shines; Protectionist Claims Demolished During an Animated Encounter.” “David Slays Goliath” is the heading to the leading article. - - • > One of Mr. Roberts’ arguments took the form of a leg of New Zealand mutton. This he laid on the table . “Here is a leg of mutton,” he declared. “This leg of mutton was bom in Mr. Redwood’s home country—New Zealand.” (Laughter). Mr. Redwood: And good stuff. .(Laughter)- - T Mr. Roberts: It is good stuff. I have. nothing to say against the New Zealanders or the Australians. We all agree with the policy of hands across the sea, but it is legs across the sea that worries us. (Laughter). I wish Mr. Redwood would let his Australian friends know that we believe in friendship in the Empire, but we don’t want so much cold shoulder from Australia. (Laughter). WILD POLICIES. British farmers had got hard work before them, despite protection or no protection. They had the fact that the consumer paid three times as much for what he bought as the farmer got for what he sold. The present Minister of Agriculture had told them that protection would not help, unless we had reorganisation. There was the problem of the sale of live stock. Protection was a better argument than any other that we should reorganise so ' that the farmer and the consumer should get a fair crack of the whip. Mr. Roberts concluded by contending that the Agricultural Party was on too narrow a basis. The root of our troubles was the fall in prices, due to big international causes. He believed that. Lord Beaverbrook and the section of the Conservative Party for; which he stood, had no solution for the present troubles. “Times are bad, but they will improve. Don’t go in for wild policies which are only going to get you into worse trouble in the end.” (Applause); The moral of the debate seems to have been merely that Freetrade is taking a long time to die in the areas round about the north-west of England.