FARMERS’ PROBLEMS

Wanganui Chronicle, Volume 80, Issue 87, 13 April 1938, Page 5

FARMERS’ PROBLEMS

MAKIRIKIRI REMITS

MR. MONTGOMERIE AT OPIKI

(Special to “Chronicle.”) “Your support for the Makirikiri branch in its protest to head ollice that insufficient justice had been dont to the three remits so unfortunately associated with my name is indeed refreshing, for it indicates an interest on the part of the branch on the very necessary side of farming, ’ said Mr R. O. Montgomerie, when addressing a meeting of the Opiki (Palmerston North) branch of the Farmers’ Union last evening. “It further indicates a courage seldom encountered, for the Opiki branch to run the risk of possible severe criticism from within the union, for daring to ask that full in-, vestigation be given these vital questions. Even if you have not supported the remits in question, it was nevertheless a most courageous step on your part to stress for adequate investigation. “There now seems to be a realisation that the Farmers’ Union has not been able to establish in the minds ot the general public, the economic rights of our agriculture. Thiis is in no way intended as a reflection on any of the ftast devoted services of those who have built the Farmers' Union into its present state. These very public-spirited individuals have done as much as the rank and file member of the union has permitted them to do. Progress could only have been more rapid and more effective had there been a more positive attitude on the part of that rank and file member, for the necessity to support financially and otherwise, a more highly organised union. The present activities of head ollice are severely, even dangerously, limited to the pathetically inadequate funds at their disposal. The most urgent question before the union is the satisfactory settling of this all important matter of adequate financial resources. 1 moved an amendment at the last Dominion Conference that the subscription be altered to one working on a sliding scale, based on either capital value of land or the annual stock returns. This amendment was defeated by a wide margin.

Economic Rights Sacrificed,

“Changing economic circumstances are now driving us to the realisation that something must be done. It is being borne in on us that the economic rights of our agriculture have been sacrificed on the altar of political opportunism and that the voice of the farmer has been inaudible in the din of partisan advantage. The profession of farming has been elbowed into a place of minor importance and the protests of the farmer lightly brushed aside. The situation calls for

our most serious attention. We must take the necessary steps to have the considered views of the Farmers’ Union, representing as it does such a vitally important branch of our national activities, the due consideration and respect to which such considered views are entitled.

“My determined and persistent advocacy of these three remits is only a very modest contribution towards showing the reasons for the urgent necessity for our addressing ourselves to the securing of that respect for these considered Farmers’ Union views. Had 1 at any stage met with effective arguments in proof of error of the arguments adduced, I would have immediately accepted the majority verdict.

Investigation Desired.

“The attitude of head ollice is that I should have submitted more concrete proposals. The fact that it has been left to an individual to point out these vital economic aspects so definitely affecting the welfare of the farmer, when these questions shoulu already have been nationally realised and nationally accepted, is a sufficient reply to this head ollice attitude. We urgently require, as never before, the searchilght of a businesslike ana economic investigation into the economics of farm production. The union cannot afford to wait on the submission of these “concrete proposals” by one individual member. It is demonstrably a job for the organisation. It is unfair to myself to expect me to undertake this tremendous task, as it is unfair to the members of the union to wait until one individual member has attacked unaided. such a formidable task.

“The extent to which the present national thought on the farm question is to affect the present political issues and endanger the farmers future control of his own industry, becomes a legitimate and urgent matter for discussion within the union. The present political outlook is based on the assumption that the farmer is overburdened with indebtedness owing to the iniquities and inherent defects in the present system as also is the burden of our national debt. We must face these grim facts and realise that the heritage we are going to hand down to our children is going to be vitally affected by whether we have the courage to establish these unassailable realities of the farm question in the public mind of this Dominion.

“The organisation whose job it is to do this is the New Zealand Farmers’ Union, as an able pen has tersely put it, by a head office organisation ’trained, equipped and backed.’ Tht New Zealand Farmers’ Union has been following in the wake of events largely through the apathy and indifference of the individual member. It can be made to lead the economic thought of this Dominion and stand for bare economic justice only, and not a partisan advantage or denial of the economic or social rights of the rest of the community.”