FARMERS’ UNION & POLITICS

Waikato Times, Volume 107, Issue 17997, 16 April 1930, Page 7

FARMERS’ UNION & POLITICS

(To the Editor.) Sir. —My attention has been oallcd to an account in your paper of the 11 111. insL, of a meeting of the executive of the Sub-Provincial District of Waikato, in which Mr Boyd, of Matangi, is reported as making serious allegations against Mr Poison, Mr Henderson and myself. In view of the fact that neither Mr Poison nor myself were present I crave space to deny the allegations made, and in so doing wish to express my regret that Mr Boyd should so grossly misrepresent the position, especially in the absence of two of those whom he attacks. I wish to state that I was appointed one of a deputation to wait oil the Dominion executive of the Farmers’ Union to represent to that executive the desire of the Waikato Sub-province to be given provincial status. In doing so the deputation referred to the growing importance of the Waikato district which centres round Hamilton, which town, in addition to being the distributing point of a large and important farming district, is the shopping and business centre of a large farming population. Further, there is a greater community of interest in this district than there is in the extensive area which at present has Auckland as its centre. The political activities of the Auckland executive were plainly stated to be one of the matters which the Waikato Subprovince took strong exception to the statement was made that while the Auckland executive will probably deny th.eir association as a union with the Farmers’ Party, most of the executive are members of this political party’s executive, and the Dominion secretary is secretary of this particular political organisation, and the issue of the paper “ Farming First ” is regarded more as a political publication than as a bona fide Farmers’ Union paper. The objection is not to the Farmers’ Party, but to the very close association of the Auckland executive, whose action Is quite contrary to the rules of the Union (which stand, as far as political activity is concerned, for “ Principles, not Party”) and is the cause of many farmers of other political view's refusing to have any connection with the Union as long as it favours one particular party.

I deny absolutely that I made any attempt to “ embarrass the political movement so firmly established in the Auckland Province,” and I fail to see how the “severance of the Waikato Sub-province can embarrass the political movement so firmly established in the Auckland District.” I am not personally concerned with the Farmers’ Party, although I appreciate the objects for which they are aiming, but I am deeply interested in making the Farmers’ Union the power for good it should be in this land where-primary-production is, or should be, the national industry. So muc-h for myself. With regard to Mr Poison, the charge made is equally absurd. When the deputation puts its case before the Dominion executive a point of order was raised as to whether the rules provided for the position which had arisen. Mr Poison, in the absence of any rules, was forced as chairman to give a ruling. In view of the fact that the Waikato Executive had applied three times to the Auckland Conference for provincial status unsuccessfully, and had, as the result of a ballot, approached the Dominion executive direct, and considered that the right of appeal should be granted, which was quite a British custom, he ruled that the matter was quite in order. In doing so : he stated that it was quite within the province of the executive to express its disapproval or otherwise of his action, and a resolution was proposed and carried approving of his ruling. With these remarks I leave it to your readers to decide as to the justness of Mr Boyd’s remarks.— I am .etc., J. G. WYNYARD, Te Awamutu, 14/4/30.