Parliament Continues Debate on Dairy Bill

Wanganui Chronicle, 24 July 1947, Page 5

Parliament Continues Debate on Dairy Bill

Government Wants Industry Established and Safe, Says Minister of Land

The farming community mt Opposition, who claimed to be re] demn a Bill which the aecredite themselves helped 1o draft, said 1 her, continuing the second readin Commission Bill in the House of Mr. Skinner said there had been a big “but” every time an Opposition member spoke in support of the Bill. The measure was a complete endorsement by the industry of the principles established by Labour in 1936, ami complete fulfilment of the guaranteed price. The guaranteed price principle had been the salvation of the dairy industry.

Would it be possible to 50 ahead settling men on farms if the industry was not well established and safe? asked Mr. Skinner. Since the war 4300 men had been settled on dairy farms at a cost of £16,000,000, and of 5600 applicants for farms the majority had been graded for dairy farms. Mr. A. J. Murdoch (Opp., Marsden) said the Government had taken upon itself the selection for the Commission of three of the producers' panel ot six. but there was no guarantee that the Government’s own nominees would be acceptable to the industry. Would the Minister tell the House the Government would accept as chairman the man already approved by the industry? Mr. Murdoch reminded dairy farmers of the clause in the Bill empowering the Minister of Finance to call upon the Commission to repay in whole or part any advances made. This emphasised that any moneys advanced by the Government to the Commission were merely a loan and not a gift, as sometimes supposed. Mr. C. R. Petrie (Govt.. Otahuhu) said that if the industry had made its selection ot a nominee for the chairmanship the Government did not know the name of the person chosen. The Opposition, he added, was trying to create distrust in regard to the chairmanship, and despite its protestations of support was actually trying to sabotage the Bill. GOVERNMENT SUPERVISION

Mr. Petrie said that if the industry expected financial support or backing from the Government, now or in the future, it must realise that some measure of Government supervision must be insisted on. No Government could pledge the country’s finance to the dairy Industry without some safeguard. Mr. R. M. Algie (Opp.. Remuera) said that Government speakers had only four points to make In discussing the Bill. They had made digs at the alleged failure of private enterprise. They referred to bankruptcies among farmers, made references to the depression, and eulogised the Government’s guaranteed price scheme. If the guaranteed price scheme was as good as the Government represented, why was it being abandoned? Mr. Algie admitted that his support

ust think it strange to hear the presentatives of the farmers, contd representatives of the farmers the Minister of Lands (Mr. Skinig debate of the Dairy Marketing Representatives tonight.

of the Bill was grudging because the Government had not -given any clear statement of its reasons for changing its policy, the Bill did not go as far as the National Party's policy went, the Bill was not what the farmers asked for, and because the Bill was not what the producers thought they were getting. Mr. Algie asked why was the Minister of Finance giving up his foster child—was the child getting too hot to hold? The Bill gave the producers a voice, but it could be a voice which need not be listened to. The real change introduced by the Bill was a move from one authority to another, giving the new authority power to fix the price by the old method. The Minister of Finance was still in the saddle. Mr. W. H. Gillespie (Opp.. Hurunui): He’s got the spurs on, too. DEPENDS ON CO-OPERATION The success of the Commission, said Mr. Algie, would depend on co-opera-tion between the farmers and the Government, and he appealed to the Government not to "throw in all the little spanners it can supply." thus compelling the farmer to withdraw his co-operation. Mr. Algie hoped this taste of freedom given to the farmer would strengthen his determination to seek more freedom. Mr. Parry, Minister of Internal Affairs, said the Bill was the product of very friendly negotiations and complete agreement between representatives of the farming industry and the Government. The Bill would be ot great benefit to the Industry and to the nation in general. The Opposition had been grudging in its approval of the Bill, and its attitude had been like that of the Australian snake which, when hurt, bit itself. Th® venomous attack on the Government by the Opposition would be well understood because the Opposition had been compelled to walk in behind the Government. The Opposition was in a humiliating position. It did try to get a crumb of comfort by saying the Bill was in line with its policy. .The farmers, Mr. Parry said, were always in favour ot the guaranteed price and organised marketing, The complaint of the Opposition, in unvarnished language, was that the farmers had let them down badly by agreeing with the Government on the Bill. Mr. W. A. Bodkin (Opp., Central Otago) said that nnless the Bill were going to place the farmers in a less advantageous position than they were now in the Opposition had no reason to vote against it. That was the reason for the Opposition's attitude in voting fdr the Bill, although they did not approve of all aspects of it. The House rose at 10.30 p.m. until 2.30 p.m. to-morrow.