The Farmer Pays At Every Turn

Chronicle (Levin), 31 July 1948, Page 7

The Farmer Pays At Every Turn

WELLINGTON, July 30. Tho Opposition elected to diseuss a HubjeQt — ludes, skins aiid stabilisation accounts — wlien the debate on the Irnprest Supply Bill vvas resumed in. the iiouse of llepresentatives this afternoon. Mr, W. J. Broadfoot (Waitomo, Opposition), said it vvas opportune to cxamine prices paid to" producers for their produce. Tliey liad been told that the increases paid by Great Britain were to meet increased costs of production but notwithstanding that, the increases had been diverted into other avenues sucli as stabilisation accounts. There vvas a great deal of loose talk about inflation. . When these nioneys were paid into stabilisation accounts, it vvas stated the reason was to keep inflation dovvn, but it was found t-hat the money vvas immediately spent by the Goverument aiubwent into circulation. Therefore, the claim that by withholding the money from the fanner, it was preventing inflation, was plain balderdash. Bobby calf producers were compelled to sell a large quantity of skins to Jocal tanners at a very lovv price. High quality skins were retained for the New Zealand tanners aua second quality were exported. That would have a detrimeutal effect on the Dominion's reputation for high quality exports. Many of the producers had a wrong impression about the ovvnersliip of their hinds in the stabilisation accounts. The great majority thouglit that they had an iiulividual claim on those funds but there was no such tliing as in dividual ownership of them. No other section of the community had a part of its earnings taken away from it. Bobby calf producers wefe'eompclled to subsidise local tanners, but if local industiy was to be subsidised, wli; should not the wliolc of the communitv pay the subsidv. 'Producers were also compelled to subsidise hides and tallow required by Ihe local market. The Goverument 's handling of thc stabilisation accounts had been disastrous not ouly to producers but also to Ihe country because the funds in them had been employed in aggravating and inteusifying inflation vvhich was rainpant today. The funds should be under the control of primary producers themselves. The National Party's policy was to restore to the farmers the right to manage their own affairs, with producer control of their coinmodities and stabilisation accounts. The stabilisation accounts were large enougli and producers should have extra money to enable them to go . on with their deierred mamtenance and to piake 1mprovements 'and extensions. Mr. Broadfoo^ r&aid if Ihe wire and nianure were iiiadd avaiiable, another i,U00,UU0 acres of land euyld be brougla ,uty production very quickJy. % ... | Rickety Economic System. I Mr. F. B. L'orbeLt (Lgmont, * Opposi- ■ lion) said tliat subsidies were being .ippiied at the expense of the farmers io bolstor up a rickety ecouomic sys- 1 ,em. The-' mmiey required -to inipJeuient ihe stabilisation policy "should be iuet .jy the vvhole of the couimunity and not •>y one section. Lach ycar an mcreas,ii o- xuiiuber of skins 'had been asked fur by the leather mauufaet'urers in New, Zealand and the Governmont had (hsisted; that .tlie industry supply them. ile would also like'to kndvv' vvliat was .iciug done wi,th the increasing nuniber ef skins asked for by tlie tanners. lie nad heard it suggcsted tliat some of the vliiiis W.ere being exported to Australia as an oft'set to the lovv prices New Zealand paid Australia for vvheat. It was asked whether the huge trade in luxuiv goods could be considered esseutiai. i'lie yvliole situation required investigating aud common justice meted out to the industry. False Prosperity. Mr. II. 0. Gerard (Ashburton, Opposition) said it vvas a fainiliar cry of the irovernnieiit tliat the farmers were i.etter off than cver. Like other seclions of the comnitinity, they liiight iiave more ready money and niortgages niight have been paid olT, but it vvas at Lhe expense of niaintenance because shortages of labour and materials pru vented' monev being put liack into rarms. In ell'ect the prosperity was a false one. Mr. A. L. Arinstrong (Napier, J.abour) said it vvas recognised tliat farnis liad gone back because farmers' sons aud employees had been away at the vvar and materials liad also been sliort. it appcared to Iiim that tlie Opposition liad a squealing, grcianing, moaning coniplex instoad of recognising that New Zealand, compared vvitli liianv other c.ountries, sliould be Ihe happiest in tlie world. Farmers Pay The Subsidies. Mr. T. L. Macifonald (WaJlace, Opposition), dealing vvitli edible fat, said tliat the Britisli ration vvas microscop.ic by New Zealand standards, but it was being vvasted in this country because it did not pay to save it or have it collected. It was not because Britain was not paying a good price — £K»7 a ton for highest grade — but tlie price to ex porters was only up to £50 (X.Z. curreucy) a ton and the dilfereuce wliieh last vear amounted to £(523.000 was paid into the pool accounts. But thosc roqui ring tallow for local manufacture could get it for £25 to £50 a ton with- ! out any of the dift'erence between that and the price obtained overseas, being paid into the stabilisation or any other account. In effect tliat nieant a sul) sidy on soap, candles and other produets mnde frnm tallow, at the expense of primary producers. Mr. MacDonald said that if local manufacturers liad to pay tlie overseas price, another £1,250,000 a year would be availublg at. least to-the pool accounts if not to the producer direct. - Mr. A^r-r. Baxter ^ (Raglan, Labour) s&id «he liad yet'fo' lVertV a eon'Structive suggestinn from the Op)iosition as to how thc ponl accounts should be used. other than their purpose to aet as n buffer acainst a recession in prices. Asreenients had lieen niade with tlie primary producers that were different in I'ljaractor and lie would xveleome a uuiform agreenient. Negotiations were "at prbsent takinu place between tlie l^nrb'rs of tlie bobby calf industry and Goverument aua it was wrong to

raise the matter - until those negotiations were eompletjed. The Minister in (Jharge of Btabilisation, Mr. Norduieyer, had given the leader of tlie industry an assurance that if tlie industry could prove its costs of production nad increased, a cor'respondmg increase in price would be granted. Tne debate vvas continued by Government and Opposition speakers until 5.35 p.m. Imprest amounting "to £15,991,500 — one monthx's supply — was granted after. vvhich the llouse rose for the weokend until 2.30 p.m. on Tuesday.