THE DAIRY INDUSTRY

Wanganui Chronicle, Volume 77, Issue 257, 30 October 1934, Page 6

THE DAIRY INDUSTRY

CAN CONTROL ITSELF GOVERNMENT’ POLICY WRONG. would like to take this opportunity to say very emphatically that the dairy industry should and can run its own business muck more efficiently than is possible by any Government,” said Mr. W. Goodfellow to a “Chronicle” representative at Auckland. ‘‘All that is required is for Parliament to give the dairy farmers the legislation asked for in 1923, which was an improvement on the Danish system, and a thoroughly efficient organisation would rapidly develop, an organisation that would be 100 per cent, co-opera-tive in principle and in fact. The farmers would then own and control their own business, and would accept full responsibility. What possible excuse is there then for this Government control, which will mean another army of inspectors and board officials, which must be paid for by the producer. Economists or planners in other countries have been proved wrong and discredited. Even in the United States there is an indication that saner councils will prevail. Why not follow the safe lead of Great Britain, which stands out like a lighthouse in a sea of trouble, and there,by take no undue risks? The New Zealand Manufacturers’ Federation was, in his opinion, in a large measure, responsible for the present Government policy favouring restrictions of exports. Mr. Masters represented the local manufacturers, Mr. Coates the farmers and other interests. A coalition was the result, which, meant a continual compromise or a dissolution. This in turn ended in secondary industries, getting practically all their own way, with the result that New Zealand has, during the Coalition period, developed along the lines o 1 -’ extreme nationalism, which, if persisted in will’ gradually lose us the British market. The Meat Board are already in difficulties and other branches of agriculture will have a similar experience later. Ottawa Agreement Broken. “This restriction of imports ol British goods since Ottawa has resulted in the rapid development of local industries. which must in turn mean the restriction of exports to the United Kingdom. Thus we see the necessitv of a supreme authority, which will enable the Government, without consulting the farmers, to restrict production by the arbitrary imposition of a costly system of rigid farm and factory control. New Zealanders, as a matter of fact, made a worse showing since the Ottawa Agreement was signed in the matter of buying goods from the United Kingdom than any other Dominion. We have actually reduced our imports and expanded our exports:— 1934 N.Z. exports to U.K. £40,600,000 1934 N.Z. imports from U.K £11,000,000 Government Podicy Wrong. “The Government policy is, in my opinion, all wrong, and if not quickly reversed, will land the country into an exceedingly difficult situation. What the Government should have done long ago was to let British goods come in. in terms of the. Ottawa Agreement, and reduce costs all round, so as to enable the farmer to carry on without undue bolstering. A trade agreement should also be negotiated with the United Kingdom, giving New Zealand a larger share of the British market, and an effort made to induce the British Government to apply a dump duty on all imports from countries where internal prices had been inflated. Bv this means, Now Zealand’s future would have been secure and once neutralised. trade barriers would rapidly be removed. With a reduction in prices in Europe consumption would rapidly increase and prices rise. The British Attitude. “The Commission suggests that a delegation should be sent to London to enquire into marketing and to ascertain from the British Government how far they are going in the matter of agriculture. There is no need to send another delegation to London. All the information is available in New Zealand and this question has already been answered by Major Elliot (the British Minister of Agriculture). On Friday, July 27. 1924, when he addressed the Royal Empire Society In I London, he stated:— “ ‘When people say, ‘‘How far you going?” I would say. first of all, to-' wards stabilisation of the present agricultural position. We do not wish that, the production of food should further diminish. Secondly, we think a reasonable expansion max- take place. Between .1921 and the a present day. 150,000 persons left the land. This indicates a great diminution in our agricultural population. When people say. ‘'How far are you going?” 1 reply. ‘‘There are 2.000.000 unemployed in this country.” T do not say anything like a large proportion of the 2,000.000 unemployed should be placed on the land, but the rest of Ihe. world have locked us out of factories and have locked us into the fields. You cannot expect people to walk up and down the fields and do nothing to them. That a proportion of people have been turned out of the factories info the fields is one of the factors of the twentieth century which the" century will have to reckon with.’ "It is suggested that, after obtaining this information, the British Government should he asked to arrange for a conference of representatives of all dairy countries which supply the British market, both Empire and foreign. This is about the most stupid suggestion that has yet been made and New Zealand will be well advised to allow the British Government, which has a favourable trade balance with these countries, to handle all such negotiations. Would any good purpose be served by combining our opponents in a round-table discussion? Anyway, why combine the opposition?” Mortgage Corporation Plan. Referring to the mortgage corporation plan, Mr. Goodfellow stated that he was strongly of the opinion that no system in any country was better than our New Zealand Advances to Settlers (Department. It borrowed at lowest rates and spread repayment of interest and capital over 36| years. If this department were supplied with ample funds, and were allowed to advance up to 70 per cent, of to-day’s values, the mortgage situation would rapidly solve itself without further Government interference. In the past. 1 per cent, redemption had been required. but this should be. reduced to i per cent., so as to ease the gross

amount which the farmer could require to pay. If such were done, money could be lent at * per cent., including redemption of J per cent. He suggested, further, that ample money would be available for long-term security, if the Government would make mortgages free of income tax for a definite period of years. The mortgage corporation idea appeared to be designed to clean up the national balance-sheet by transferring a lot of bad and doubtful loans to a new account, which would thou be gradually written down over a long period of years. The huge loss on loans made by the Government, due to political control, was only further evidence of the failure of* Government in business.