FOOD CONFERENCE

Evening Post, Volume CXL, Issue 102, 27 October 1945, Page 8

FOOD CONFERENCE

NX DELEGATION

FARMERS' VIEWPOINT

- Criticism of the fact that no direct representative of the primary producers had been included in the New Zealand delegation to the conference of.the Food and Agriculture Organisation at Quebec was voiced by Opposition members during the debate on (the Imprest Supply Bill (No. 3) in the House of Representatives yesterday. There was also criticism of the statement made to the conference by the leader of the delegation, the Hon. D. Wilson, New Zealand High Commissioner in Ottawa. In his reply to the debate, the Minister of Finance (Mr. Nash) said that if anybody were to blame for not sending a representative of the farmers it was himself, but he had understood at the time that the conference was of Government representatives.

Mr. W. J. Poison (National, Stratford) stated that when the world food conference at Quebec was discussing a matter,.vitally affecting the economy of New Zealand, the Government had selected to head the country's delegation a-gentleman,, who, if he did possess" a profound knowledge of primary production, had successfully concealed that from the people of his own country. Tlie Hon. David Wilson, to Whom he was referring, was a former Labour • Party secretary, and that fentleman, true to the canons of the tades'Hall and his industrial bosses, had-promulgated a new type of economy which those concerned with the progress of New Zealand regarded as fantastic and absurd.

According to that oracle, who must, he said, have spoken derisively, New Zealand's economy was based on the export of foodstuffs, and the prices must-be in line with the costs of New Zealand's internal, economy. In other words, the country was to have its economy in reverse gear, and the world must adjust its prices to whatever -was ncessary for New Zealand to charge' in order to carry out the policy laid down by the Government.

FARMERS INDIGNANT.

! Mr. Poison said there was great inidignation among the farming community that such an inaccurate theory manufactured in the Trades Hall should1 be expounded to a world gathering.

When the rest of the world got back Into normal economic gear the extraordinarily high war prices of primary products must fall, and the effect on the producers would be desperately serious. It was essential that there should be a tremendous expansion of Sroduction to carry obligations which c conceded were entirely necessary and desirable in the interests of a happy people. He gave the Government credit for that, but warned them that he could see dangers ahead with a price fall unless greater encouragement was given to the primary industry. /

The Prime Minister: We know that if prices rocket, they will come down again. '■" Mr. Poison added that for that reason he was anxious that instead of exploiting everything else, the Government should tackle the expansion of primary production. The-Minister of Agriculture (Mr. Roberts) said the delegation to Quebec >was headed from New Zealand by the Director-General of Agriculture (Mr. Fawcett) and the Deputy Director of the Export Marketing Division (Mr. Pottinger). As there was so much criticism about the sending of delegates overseas it was considered .'that Mr. David-Wilson should lead the deputation. . ,' . Mr. S. W. Smith (National, Bay of Islands): He* knows nothing about farming at all. , Mr:""'-'- J. Thorn (Government, Thames): He's a jolly good statesman, anyway. . , •_. , ,; Mr M. *H. • Oram (National, Manawatu): Will the Minister say why a farmer was' not ,sent?

OBJECT OF CONFERENCE

Mr Roberts replied that the main purpose'of the conference was to lay a basis for world agriculture. It was not so much a matter of how much a pound should be paid for butterfat, but marketing procedure and production plans which would bring into being the vision of Mr. Churchill and the late President Roosevelt. Arrangements had been made for a big delegation of farmers to go to Britain in the spring of next year, and he fancied that the conference there would be a very necessary preliminary to the ultimate laying of a basis for world agriculture. . .... Referring to Mr. Poison's criticism of Mr. Wilson, the Ministensaid it was not necessary for a man to be able to milk cows to know something about agricultural organisation. It was not a question of prices paid during the war but of building a stabilised world agriculture so that farmers would not be frustrated by slumps and depressions,'which previous Governments had not been able to stem. "The; farmers of this country have never been more permanently -Pros-perous-than they are at present, said Mr Roberts. "The bankers know it ancT the- stock and station agents sec their business being undermined because farmers are paying off their mortgages and debts.. God help the working farmers of this country if tne other-side had the manipulation of affairs' -today. It would i be all right for the farmer who milks the shareniilker-.-'' . * ' HIGH PRICES NOT THE WAY.

"W&rhave to see that our economy With Great Britain is maintained on a basis' which will provide her with food and which will also be witmn the economy of New Zealand, continued the Minister, "and high prices are not the way to do it. None pi us knows what the repercussions will be regarding margarine and various other competitive factors such as Denmark and the return to agriculture.in,some of the European countries " ■ Mr K. J. Holyoake (National, Pahiatua) said New Zealand was represented by two Departmental officers who were good selections; but the Opposition criticism was that they were purely Departmental officers. It was necessary to get the good will and co-operation of any section of the community, but the Government had not acted on that maxim with the farmers. New Zealand, with the greatest quantity of exports per population, was the only British country without primary producers in its delegation to Quebec. . _ , ' Mr Roberts had been appointed to Cabinet as,the farmers' friend, and he should be fighting the farmers' battles; but every time he spoke in the House he was very provocative and "had a crack"-.at farmers' organisations. From the general policy and attitude of the Government one would say that the farmers were entitled to hold and voice the view that the . Government was setting out deliberately to antagonise farmers' organisations. Mr. 'Thorn ridiculed the suggestion that the Government was out to discourage or embarrass the farmers. He read a telegram from Mr. H. F. Nicholl* chairman of the United Wheatgrowers' Organisation in Christchurch, complimenting, on behalf of the organisation's electoral committee, the Minister of Industries and Commerce (Mr. Sullivan) for his knowledge and sympathetic understanding of wheat growers' problems and thanking him for his assistance to the industry- Mr. Thorn, said the telegram was significant of the attitude of the Government to farmers and of the attitude of reasonable farmers to the Government. The same spirit as that shown by the Minister of Industries and Commerce had been expressed by the Government over the past ten years to all the farmers. The individual farmer would admit that as a result of the Government's policy there was no comparison between his living and working conditions and his income now and what they were before the Government came rinto office. The Opposition wanted to revert to Rafferty's rules in the interests of the banks, merchants, and gentry of Tooley Street, who before the Government took office, used to take farmers down right and left. He liked the attention being given by the Quebec Conference to organisation. Considerable notice had been taken of the statement by the leader of the New Zealand delegation. Had there been 'a farmer there he could not have made out a better case. Without organisation in dealing with these matters there would be a condition of anarchy and chaos in no time, and he was glad to note that that was being Increasingly recognised by such conferences as that being held at Quebec.

Mr. Nash, replying to the discussion, said that if anybody were to blame for not sending a representative of the farmers to the Quebec conference it was himself, as the Prime Minister was away from New Zealand. He understood at the time that the conference was merely one of officials and he had discussed the matter with the Minister of Agriculture. Mr. Poison: The farmers made representations.

The Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Holland): And you said it was official. The Minister: Whatever I said at that time was right at that time. Continuing, the Minister said the Government officials who were sent were the best possible delegates. Mr. J. Acland (National, Temuka): If it" happens again would it not be wise to suggest a representative of the farmers? The Minister: That is right.