The Daily News SATURDAY, NOVEMBER 3, 1934. DAIRY LEGISLATION.

Taranaki Daily News, 3 November 1934, Page 6

The Daily News

SATURDAY, NOVEMBER 3, 1934. DAIRY LEGISLATION.

OFFICES: NEW PLYMOUTH, Currie Straet STRATFORD, Broadway. HAWERA. High Street.

The decision of the Federation of Taranaki Co-operative Dairy Factories to invite directors and suppliers of factories not members of the federation to be present at’ a meeting at Stratford on Monday is' quite commendable. The federation stands for improved methods and for general reform within the industry, and it has shown itself on more than one occasion—the Hawera Laboratory is a case in point—willing to practise the doctrine of self-help. It may be accepted therefore that the examination of the proposed dairy legislation by the federation will be characterised by a thorough appreciation of the difficulties that surround any proposals for assisting the dairy industry. The emphasis that has been placed upon the need, for a clear statement from the Government in regard to the financial proposals of the Bill now before Parliament can be quite understood. So far the most authoritative statement made on behalf of the Cabinet is the one made by the Minister of Finance, the Rt. Hon. J. G. Coates, on Wednesday last, in which he stated the Government does not approve of a subsidy to dairy farmers, but hoped to give them relief through a reduction in the costs of production. Mr. Coates indicated some of the methods of bringing about that reduction which apparently commend themselves to the Government. A rebate on rates has been promised, and a marked reduction in interest is the goal towards which the Government is striving, although it has not yet made up its mind whether the lowered rates will be brought about by compulsion of or negotiation with the mortgagees. of farm lands. In this connection the delegates to the meeting on Monday might well investigate the means of obtaining relief that already exist before urging upon the Government the necessity of passing fresh legislation for that purpose. Mf. Coates pleaded for a “steady course”, to oe taken in regard to the dairy industry, and it was an appeal ;hat had a good deal of justification. There is no need for panic, but there is need, and everyone agrees upon this, for some assistance to a most important industry. If relief is to come in the shape of reduced interest, reduced rates, and grants in aid of better production, they are proposals that demand careful analysis, and should not be condemned because they are not the form of assistance some public speakers have advocated. As regards interest rates, for instance, has full advantage been taken of the machinery that al-

ready exists for this purpose? The Mortgage Relief Commission has been operating in Taranaki for a year or two, and so far as can be judged from the evidence made public it has never failed to give sympathetic treatment when it was warranted.. The percentage of refused applications for relief has been small, and it would be interest-

ing to know how many applicants have actually been turned off their farms because relief was refused by the commission. This is but one case where a knowledge of the facts will help those present at the meeting to arrive at a truer estimate of the position than by listening to arguments arising from misunderstandings or to a series of political or quasi-political attacks upon the Government. At the time the meeting is being held at Stratford the mortgage commission will be sitting at Inglewood with the intention of performing the duty with which it has been entrusted, namely, to grant relief where it is warranted, and will give a farmer a reasonable chance of recovery. The dairy industry needs help, and needs it promptly. It would be a mistake to waste time and energy in urging a new proposal upon the Government and neglect while doing so the opportunities already in existence. As Minister of Finance, Mr. Coates recognises the responsibilities involved by a direct subsidy to any one industry. He told the House that such a relief method would make any rearrangement of mortgage liability impossible, and so far no one seems to have found a satisfactory reply to his argument. There are two interested parties to mortgage liabilities, the borrower and the lender, and any adjustments made must be fair to both if justice is to be done and farm properties are to be considered sound security for future investment. That is a phase that must be recognised in any discussions that are to be productive of real service to the industry.