REWARD NOT FAIR

Gisborne Herald, Volume LXVI, Issue 19998, 25 July 1939, Page 14

REWARD NOT FAIR

DAIRY FARMERS’ RETURNS GUARANTEED PRICE MR. HAMILTON’S CLAIM BASIS OF ASSESSMENT (Per Press Association.) WELLINGTON, this day. The failure of the Government to pay a guaranteed price far dairy produce sufficient to place the dairy armers on a basis comparable with ..he general standard of living, was referred 1 to by the Leader of the Opposition, the Hon. Adam Hamilton, in a statement last hig'ht. The Minister of Marketing, the Hon. W. Nash,, Said -Mr. ''Hamilton, had passed over entirely th'e basic factors set.out. in thb Primary Products Marketing Act for assessing the guaranteed price. “As we are pow a .week or .so of. the en.d of the. dairy year .•■it is no-t, to, be wondered .at jhafc many expressions 'opinion,., .being offered by farmers’,- organisations pn the nierjj.s aird dhincriW-of .the guaranteed price system,” said Tfainilto.n, . “Though ther,e is genera} satis fafction Axpresjse'd with the 1 present marketing, System,' there is much criticism and disappointment with the Government’s .failurg to pay. a price that will place ’the dairy farmers .on a basis comparable .With the general standard of living throughout New Zealand. .• ; v •. A.. Recommendation Recalled “The dairy' farmers have,not forgotten the Government’s treatment of the price recommendation of the special committee set up by the Government to fix the price tor the 1933-39 season. The. farmers looked upon that, committee as the dairy farmers’,,Arbitration Court, setting out to fix a fair price. “The under cut'ting, of .the,., committee's decision 1 meant a 1 decrease of £1,289,000 tb tbp 'flaky industry lor the year- As eventshave, proved,the farmers rebeivfed. short payment of that amount at.feist from, thfc 'Government, without taking, .into . consideration at all the failure of the Government .to check the upward spiral of costs. “The dairy farmers have been told virtually that the price to be paid for butterfat must be based on London realisations, and that continued deficits would break the scheme down. “To say that there -is no alternative to the present system than to revert to the system operating prior to 1936, is wholly misleading. This is not now possible for obvious reasons. Problem oi Exchange “It might also be asked if a reversion to the 1936 conditions would bring about free exchange, as existed n; that date, but. at present many farmers can see the Government’s breach of faith with .them, through the ever-rising costs, exchange control, and the breakdown of both the letter and .the spirit of the promises made in 11)35 and afterwards, embodied in the Primary Products Marketing Act. “This is the crux of the dairy, farmers’ situation to-day, and any other discussion is away from the point. What ’dairy farmers are, concerned with, as well as farmers generally, is that it the Government cannot reward the farmers ■syiU) the sanic yard. stick tneasitfement as is * Used fob other sections of the community, is it not. then a fair request to ask that other, sections, of the community should be rewarded with the same measuring tape as is used for the farmers?

“All are agreed that dairy- farming constitutes a very important basic part of our economic life, as does farming generally, and it does seem only fair that dairy farmers should not be asked to work on.. a lower standard of reward than other sections.” - ; ya.: .a -