FARMING AFFAIRS

Bay of Plenty Beacon, Volume 7, Issue 100, 18 August 1944, Page 4

FARMING AFFAIRS

Sir, —In reply to E. J. Whyte's letter in Friday's I desire, for the benefit of the whole dairying industry to make public the utterly ridiculous situation which is being Created throughout the district by organisers operating under the Auckland Executive of the New Zealand Farmers' Union. I do not consider it necessary to answer Mr Whyte's contradiction of any statement of mine, because I have actually heard him contradict, his own statements. The true situation is this: A conference; was held in Wellington on July 20th "and following days between representatives of the New Zealand Farmers' Union and the Sheepowners' Federation and an agreement was reached to support to the full a chance called the Adams Plan under which the fourteen difJ ferent branches of the farming industry are required to organise, each within its own Association and elect delegates to a properly constituted body to be known as the United Farmers' Federation of New Zealand. As this step was decided upon after lengthy discussion .and many of the smaller farmers' organisations have already signified their willingness to join the U.F.F., the present activity of E. J. Whyte and Co. must raise' doubts as to their integrity, for while the real leaders are working overtime on the formation of a really united front, the Auckland Executive and its organisers are, doing their utmost to prevent any kind of unity. What is their object? Are they too in the pocket of Messrs McLagan, J. Roberts and Co? These organisers will be receiving some honorarium as N.Z.F.U. officials, which means they are paid by the farmers for performing the greatest disservice the industry has ever suffered. I need for answer Mr Whyte's claims on behalf of the N.Z.F.U. as he serves only H. M. Rushworth and A. E. and, perhaps a few oth.^

Each of thp- fourteen branches of the farming industry has its own association which can elect delegates to the United Farmers' Federation, with the sole exception of. the dairying branch. Why? Will any sanef man ? without an ulterior motive and fully aware of the liopeless muddle being made by outside interference and control of dairj'ing, deny ths dairy farmer the right to. an organisation of his ojvn not includ-? ing six other branches of. farming. In answer to Mr Whyte's appeal to farm workers and sharemilkers to join the N.Z.F.U. I am surprised at this audacity. How can we workers be expected to follow an organiser who ignored us until the D.P.A. came into existence? How t can /we back an organisation, which seems ! in the light of recent events to embrace the Auckland Executive only plus E. J. Whyte? On the other hand we have been offered membership in the Dairy Producers' Association from its inception. This is the first association attempted by dairy farmers for dairy producers only. Its founders are, Returned Soldiers of. the World War 1, and there is lots of fight in them yet 5 especially when the freedom, for which they sacrificed so is threatened. The D.P.A. is so constituted that its executive can never become an infirmary. Outside the Auckland provincial district there is very little antagonism to the new organisations. In fact in a number of places, where the N.Z.F.U branches consisted wholly of dairy farmers the entire-' branch switch-* ed over and what was a N.Z.F.U. branch become without change a branch of the D.P.A. I would also sound a note of warning concerning dairy farmers and their employees. There is a move in hand to legislate for compulsory unionism for all sharemilkers and farm workers. If this comes off, and we become the tools of the Federation of we will not be used for any purpose but to weaken the farmers. I rather believe that it would force the farmers back to peasantry. We must face, the fact and these are momentous days, not only for but for the dairying industry and in reply to E. J. Whyte I appeal to all concerned thus:" If you are not satisfied with things as they : (Continued in previous column)