VOICE OF THE PEOPLE

Taranaki Daily News, 3 September 1934, Page 7

VOICE OF THE PEOPLE

VIEWS ON CURRENT TOPICS EXTERMINATING FARMER CLASS. RESULT OF RECENT LEGISLATION. ff (To the Editor.) Sir,—The new Budget reflects the ireturn of prosperity at the full (expense of the exporting dairy farmer. •The restoration of cuts to civil servants (retrospective) and the rehabilitation of wages, recommended by Mr. Forbes as a duty of every employer, is tile last blow which will surely crush this class of farmers. Since the dairy crisis of five years duration reached at last unbear- t able proportions and the Government issued its SOS plan in April, 1934, nearly half a year elapsed, bringing to some 60,000 dairymen nothing but further calamities. Bobby calf business has gone, the boneless beef trade is finished, pigs are threatened by quotas and butter-fat prices are 25 per cent, lower than at the same time last year. The Government in April very brightly announced that a passive policy is inadequate. It has taken the view that responsibility in tackling the crisis rests entirely with the Government. - . . ’ Five months of further agony passed without a shadow of any action, any support or any earthly mindedness. The exporting dairy farmers face now a new increase in costs brought about by fhe new customs tariffs, increase in labour and living costs, transport, manufacturing charges, etc.—to please the Labour Party. The only industry which is in a real and terrible predicament ‘(compare the sheep, wheat, fruit, poultry, town supply farming, etc.), is forgotten and doomed, unless the Dairy" Commission achieves a miracle. -But will it? The exporting dairymen are allowed to drift at the mercy of the crisis. But they are not permitted to go free in their work. For they are ruthlessly fastened to factories arid yoked, as a whole, to the outrageous cream grading and newly invented regulations. By ’squeezing the producers and cultivating unpayable markets the. exporting dairy industry is deliberately made quite 'uneconomical. Who are the gainers? -It is hard to find any.—l am, etc., ■ OPTIMIST. RECIPROCAL TRADE. . : (To the Editor.) Sir,—The grocers of > Lancashire have now beaten the Federal Government over the cotton duties, and there is a lesson in this dispute for the New Zealand Government. It clearly defines the feelings of Our principal customer, when high restrictions kill the trade in British manufactured goods. Our Minister for Customs is endeavouring to foster the belief that New Zealand treats the English manufacturer liberally. The Hon. J. G. Coates is fond of comparing our high tariff and severe trade restriction with those of Australia, which are still higher in several instances. However, if on account of distance and freight,, and exchange and duty, the trade in a manufactured article is killed, then the higher Australian duty is no worse than that of New Zealand. If a landing cost of 90 per cent, prohibits the import of certain articles then an extra 20 per cent is neither here nor there. ' In one respect New Zealand shows up in a worse light than any other Empire country. We sell to England an amount equal to £24 per head of our New Zealand population. Yet our purchases from England equal only £6 4s 2d per head of New Zealand population. That is our ratio of purchases from England is only about 26 per cent, of our, sales to Eng-land-lower than that.’ of /Australia, Canada pr South Africa. . . It is possible that the, result of the boycott of Australian- products by the Consumers of Lancashire will have farreaching effects.' The climb-down of the Federal'Government will not be the end of it, and Britain may decide to make separate and distinct trade agreements with' different Dominions. It would be wise to remove the restrictions which undoubtedly offend the consumers in England of New Zealand produce.—l am, etc., E. C. HAYTON. New Plymouth, Sept 1.