A FARMERS' PARTY.

Dominion, Volume 3, Issue 869, 15 July 1910, Page 5

A FARMERS' PARTY.

KEEN DISCUSSION. HOW TO INFLUENCE POLITICS. CANDIDATES AND THE FBEEHOLD. How best to promote farmers' interests in Parliament—a question frequently discussed by tho" Farmers' Union—was again before that body at its Dominion Conference yesterday. Mr. E. Schmitt (Auckland) moved:— "That a farmers' party be formed." He said that he did not wish to cast a slur on either of the present political parties, but with some farmers' representatives on ono side of the House and some on the other, when an important question wa9 before them they voted on party lines, and thus' farmers' interests were not considered. Major Lusk (Auckland) said farmers were not fjo much considered in Parliament as they should be. Every country district should endeavour to send a farmers' representative to Parliament—one who would not be bound to follow Sir Joseph Ward or Mr. Massey, but woull be bound to act by the planks of the Farmers' Union. Even if they had only &■ dozen of such members, they would. - be very much stronger. In fact, such a party would be in very much the same position as the Nationalists in the House of Commons. Mr. K Lane (Hawke's Bay) said representatives in Parliament should not bo bound by the platform of the union, because some of the planks were not accepted by all the delegates. Mr. J. Talbot (Timaru) said' he was rather sorry to see the question brought ■ up. They had at the head of their order paper the , words, "Principles—not . Party." He, thought the object of tha union liad been'to steer clear of party politics, and he thought the matter had hotter be allowed to drop. As a farmer, he would have nothing to do with party politics. , Mr. Cartwright Brown: Surely we havo been trying to influence politics ever since we have been a union? . Mr. Talbot: Yes, but not in the sensa that-this means. Voices: No, no. Mr. H. A. Kevins (Tenui) deprecated the formation of a third party. . They wanted men in the House who would follow out their wishes without forming a separate parly. The President's Views. The president (Mr. J. G. Wilson) said the farmers were not on the whole favourable tu extreme party government. The Auckland remit seemed to him to be merely an extension of the present posin of the union. He had noticed that the Auckland branches had repeatedly declared themselves in this direction, but he would like to know more definitely what they mount. He thought it was not desired to. have a wholly separate farmers' party, but rather * number of metf who would unite to act iif"farmers' interests whenever occasion arose, and whatever might be the position of the Government or the Opposition. That was the - only kind of farmers' party he believed.in. Third parties were an abomination. Ho suggested referring the question to the branches. Mr. 0. F. Clothier (North Canterbury) said southern farmers ' were generally against starting a third party. The best thing to do was to increase the membership of the union as much as possible nad make it a stronger, power. Lessons of Last Election. Mr. J. C. Cooper' (Tane) expressed himself against any attempt to form a definite farmers' party, which he thought would arouse antagonism among , other classes.' The advance in the freehold sentiment in the country and in Parliament was largely due to the educative influence of the union. The last election showed that from Wellington to Napier, Masterton excepted, any candi-, date must support the union platform if ho would have a good chance of success. The union should not try to go too fast in politics, but its educative work might well be increased, especially between the present time and tho next election. Mr. 1?. F. Hockly (Hunterville) was also opposed to the formation of a third party. They should try to .strengthen the hands of their frencls in Parliament, so that the planks of the union platform might be carried into effect. Major Lusk explained that the object of the Auckland branches was to have abody of men in Parliament -who would vote for the uuion policy irrespective of existing party liues. . . s Members' Pledges. Mr. A. E. Eussell (Palmerston North) said ho would not object to a third party if it would effect the object in view,, but he did not think they could form a strong enough party. The better method was to get candidates to pledge themselves to the union platform and to fulfil their pledges ifr elected. Tho farmers would gradually get on their side everybody who had anything to lose. The farmers were the most easily attackable, but others who really had as much .to lose would' be got at in turn, and they were beginning to know it. Mr. A. Schmitt (Auckland)! said that when tho branch said "Farmers' party,"' they meant Farmers' part}'. Candidates who w;ere pledged to many other classes and organisations could not help them very much. Tho motion was amended and passed as follows:—"That the question whether it is advisable that a Farmers' party be formed be sent to the branches." ' The Freehold. Mr. J. W. Jones (Taranaki) moved: "That the question with reference to freehold put to candidates at Parliamentary elections be added to as follows':—i 'And will you take 1 active steps, and assist to the utmost, to have the optional system brought into force and made applicable in every case to'all Crown lands, and Lands for Settlement Lands?' That the sitting members be asked to takd steps in that direction.". The. mover said that some candidates pledged to the union platform on the land question had been noticcably absent from their places in the House when their Votes ijere wanted. Mr. A. E. Eussell: Let them'know at tho next election. . Mr. Jones: We did, and they're not there now! , Tho motion was carried. Tho following Wellington, remit was also adopted:—"That the agricultural interest, which is the mainstay of this Dominion, is mojt inadequately represented in the Legislative Council, seeing thatthe whole of the country districts in the Wellington province are unrepresented ■ in that Chamber."