GUARANTEED PRICE.

Taranaki Daily News, 17 July 1937, Page 6

GUARANTEED PRICE.

For the sake of its own peace of mind and for that of future Administrations there is much to be said in favour of the acceptance by the Government of an impartial ' tribunal for arriving at the fair price to be paid for the -primary products of which the\ State is now the sole purchaser. For the moment that applies to dairy produce for export only, but if Ministe'rs' statements are to be credited an extension of the system may be looked for in the not distant future. In substituting a State guaranteed price for the wins and losses incurred by producers in a cdmpetitive marketing system the Government's purpose was highly commendable. It Was intended to assure the farmer a reasonable income and itandard of living, just as similar conditions were to be conferred upon other members of the community by increasing earnings and leisure. The State can do little to ensure more leisure for the farmer, although it may do so for the farmer's employees. Nature overrules legislation for those who would win subsistence by her aid, and it was , not unnatural perhaps that farmers should have expected under the system of State control a higher monetary compensation for the long hours they must work than was found possible by a Ministry that must hold the balance as evenly as possible between the various sections of society. The price paid for dairy produce last season was accepted by the community as an experiment.. It is one that seems likely to have ended with a fairly ; substantial overpayment to producers beyond the value received by thi State for the produce when sold. If each year is to show similar results the general taxpayer, which includes farmers, will some day have to make good the deficiencies. But the gain last season to the farmer was not so substantial as would appear. Jhe Government's industrial legislation and the recovery of trading in other countries have resulted in a rise ifi production costs which> the Farmers' Union assesses at over 3d per pound butterfat on dairy farms. It seems quite evident from information published elsewhere in this issue of the Daily News that dairy farmers are becoming uneasy lest the guaranteed price for next season will, when additional costs have been tdken into account, leave them with a smaller return than would have been obtained had the produce been sold on the open market. Hence the desire for a special tribunal in which the farmer sellers would have equal representation with the State as buyer, and which would have as chairman a judge experienced in the dissection of evidence and removed from all political influences. On _ the advisoiy committee to which the Government has referred. the matter the non-farmer representation exceeds the farmer, and its findings, rightly or wrongly, will be regarded as those of a bureaucrat. Whatever its weaknesses and failings the dairy iridustry remains the most important of the Dominion's undertakirigs. For the sake of the industry and for the good of the Dominion it is essential that fair treatment should be

received by the rank and file in the army of primary producers. In most other compulsory purchases by the State the seller has the right of appeal to a Court of Justice. The forfeiture of that right was part of the price paid by the dairy farmer for the protection of 'a guaranteed price from the fluctuations of an overseas market. But acceptance of the price demanded does not minimise the right of the farmer to some say in the value to be placed upon the produce he has for sale. Under Statute he can offer it to but one buyer, and there is all the more reason therefore to avoid any action which ivould seem to indicate exploitation by the State of its position as that buyer.