The Gisborne Herald. WITH WHICH IS INCORPORATED “THE TIMES.” GISBORNE, THURSDAY, OCT. 19, 1939. INCREASING PRODUCTION

Gisborne Herald, Volume LXVI, Issue 20072, 19 October 1939, Page 4

The Gisborne Herald. WITH WHICH IS INCORPORATED “THE TIMES.” GISBORNE, THURSDAY, OCT. 19, 1939. INCREASING PRODUCTION

It was announced yesterday that the Minister of Agriculture has decided to establish district councils to assist in the promtion of increased production. Since the greatest immediate contribution which New Zealand can make towards the Empire's war effort is the provision of larger quantities of foodstuffs and raw materials, the objective of the Minister is entirely commendable. There were three other items in yesterday’s news, however, which serve to illustrate the difficulties which exist and the extent to which other aspects of Government policy tend to handicap production. It was reported that of 115 men whose names had been given to the Cook County Council for work on country contracts, no fewer than 90 had obtained exemption: the Minister of Finance announced that the basic wage ol public works employees was to be increased by 5s a ■ week; and, thirdly, it was stated at a meeting of the Auckland Education Board that the farm labour position was worse than it had been for 20 years and that elderly women and school children had to work in the cowsheds. All these authenticated reports are interrelated, and since they apparently typify conditions and do not relate to isolated cases it is imperative that they should receive earnest considera-

If farm production is to be increased there are three cardinal requisites. The first is that the returns should be sufficient to compensate the producer for his efforts; the second, that costs should not be permitted to rise to an extent which will cancel out the benefits of whatever price is fixed; and the third, that an adequate supply of labour should be available. It is doubtful whether any of these conditions are being complied with. The only prices that have so far been announced are those for dairy produce, which are to be the same as those for last year. Last year’s rate, however, was below that which the Government’s own tribunal considered necessary to give the farmer a reasonable standard of living. In the meantime, according to the Government Statistician, costs have increased by a further 4i per cent, so that the farmer is definitely worse off, although paradoxically enough, his produce is bringing higher prices on the English market. The first handicap to increased production, therefore, is that the dairy farmer, at any rate, is not being paid enough to place him on a standard commensurate with the rest of the community, while his position is being further undermined by the continued rise in the costs of both production and living. The farm labour problem is even more inexcusable. According to the latest official returns more than 21,000 men are employed on unproductive and largely unnecessary public works and it is estimated that a further 12,000 are engaged on the No. 12 relief schemes. While this labour supply is largely wasted, farmers are reducing their herds because of a labour shortage and others are able to manage only by using women and child labour. The labour market, like any other, is subject to competition and the product goes to the highest bidder, The farmer, however, is unable to bid high and certainly cannot compete with the Government. The position to-day is that the wage for relief workers on a five-day 40-hour week ranges from £4 3s 4d to £4 13s 4d, while the basic wage for public works employees is £4 5s a week. Many of them, according to the Minister, are earning more than 20s a day, and some workers engaged on Government undertakings are receiving as much as 30s a day. On the other hand, the wage for a dairy farm worker is fixed by Act of Parliament at £2 12s Gd a week of unlimited hours, the value of board being estimated at 20s a week, making an aggregate reward of £3 12s 6d a week —which is based on what the farmer is considered to be able to pay out of the guaranteed price. On the basis of a 48-hour week, workers engaged in primary industry earn Is 6d an hour, whereas the minimum rate for skilled workers in other industries has been fixed by the Arbitration Court at 2s 9d an hour and for semi-skilled workers at from 2s 5d to 2s 7Jd. How in these circumstances can farmers be expected to secure labour in the open market, and if they cannot secure sufficient labour how will it be possible to increase production? These are the questions which must be faced if New Zealand is to make the war effort that is expected of her. No one can contend that the 5s increase which has been allowed to public works employees is more than enough to compensate them for the rapidly rising cost of living, but if a basic wage of £4 5s is necessary for these workers how can the Government logically argue that the dairy farmers are not entitled to a ■price that will enable them to pay their employees more than the equivalent of £3 12s Gd? The need for some readjustment is apparent. If it is not possible to secure for the producer a return that will enable him

to pay competitive rates of wages then the only alternative, clearly, is a reorganisation of the national economy on the basis of the returns from production. In the meantime, partly through labour problems, production is declining, but, at the same time, tens of thousands of men are engaged on non-productive work which is largely financed out of taxation that becomes an added cost to the producer. This is the crux of the whole problem and until it is faced, and faced boldly, there can be no real stability for the Dominion,