BRITISH FARMING

Wanganui Chronicle, Volume 89, Issue 268, 13 November 1945, Page 5

BRITISH FARMING

LCNG-TERM FOOD POLICY FARMERS’ UNION PROPOSALS TO GOVERNMENT (Special Correspondent—N.Z.P.A.) Recd. 8 30 p.m. London, Nov. 12. British farming and food policy is the subject o'f an agreed statement by three farmers’ unions of the United Kingdom, the National Farmers’ Union of England and Wales, the National Farmers’ Union and Chamber of Agriculture of Scotland, and the Ulster Farmers’ Union. Each of these organisations published separate drafts of policy, but it was felt advisable to reach agreement on the broad principles upon which the Government should be asked to declare without delay a comprehensive long-term policy. The agreed statement records full concurrence with the findings and recommendations of the Hot Springs Conference. It declares the Government should put into effect a comprehensive long-term policy embodying the following principles:— (1) A balanced home industry with stabilised prices and a guaranteed market for the main agricultural products is essentia’. The existing procedure whereby prices are reviewed annually by the Government in consultation with the unions should become permanent in order to ensure a reasonable return to efficient producers, with adequate wages and working conditions for agricultural workers. (2) Effective regulation and coordination of imported food supplies, taking into account the full agricultural potential and nutritional requirements of the United Kingdom. The unions are of opinion that efficient marketing is an essential complement to efficient production, and recognise their responsibility to promote the most effective methods.

(3) Efficiency in husbandry and estate management, with security of tenure for good farmers. (4) Rural re-population in the interests of national health, employment and trade, by improvement of existing and provision of adequate new houses; by a comprehensive scheme of rural electrification and development of good water supplies, roads and transport facilities. The unions are prepared jointly to advise the Government and consult the appropriate departments on legislation necessary to implement this policy. In its separate detailed programme the National Farmers’ Union of England and Wales says that in the interests of the nation at large farmers are to be given "an opportunity to produce to the utmost capacity. "The view is expressed that for years there must be a world scarcity of food, and home farmers desire scope to replenish the sadly-depleted larder of the home consumer. The union agrees to control by "peace-time” counterparts” of the country war agricultural committees selected on a nomination basis but asks that their powers be restricted and that there be right of appeal against decisions to an impartial tribunal. The main function of the committees should be "the securing of good estate management and good husbandry.”

As regards marketing schemes, it is recognised that compulsory powers are fundamental to their success. While it may be expedient to include representatives from other than producer interests, the majority of the marketing boards’ members should directly represent the producers of the commodity concerned. STRONGLY ATTACKED

The "Daily Express” strongly attacks the statement and says if British farmers value the independence and future well-being of the farming community they will reject it. "The National Farmers’ Union is taking its cue from the Hot Springs Conference, which would carve up British and Empire agriculture for a woolly world ideal that will never work out in practice. And it see« no way of playing a worthy part in the post-war organisation of Britain’s agriculture other than by Government controls.” It adds that guaranteed markets are good. Fixed prices are not, and continues: "The principle of a guaranteed market for foodstuffs produced from the soil of Britain must be based on a good minimum wage for the farm worker. At present that wage should be at least £4 a week. Thereafter the nublic should receive the benefit o-f industry and invention resulting in an increase from the soil. To the extent to which the British farmer cannot meet the demand of the British consumer the market should lie onen to the empire producer. If there is any market left afterwards then foreigners can have it. There is a natural logical sequence in British agriculture. It is given little recognition in the report of the N.F.U. Council. That body has its eyes fixed on some nebulous project whereby Britain’s imports of foodstuffs are to be dictated by an international organisation. What must we take this year fyorn the Argentine, from China, from Peru? What may we leave our own folk to produce? These are not Questions which should arise about Britain’s economy. The order is all wrong.”

The "Daily Telegraph” says: "No doubt the union is right in the importance it attaches to rapid and efficient distribution, both national and international, and the avoidance of gluts and shortages which upset not. only producers but consumers. Whether its proposed remedy of the regulation of imports will effect this purpose may be a matter for debate.” The “Yorkshire Post” says the report merits the closest, and most sympathetic attention. Demand for "stability is its keynote—.stability of prices and guarantee of markets. It is much to ask hut not overmuch for an industry whose planning must always be long-term and whose flexibility is strictly limited by the factors of soil and climate.”

The Minister of Agriculture is shortly to state the Government’s policy.