The Guardian And Evening Star, with which is incorporated the West Coast Times. MONDAY, NOVEMBER 3rd, 1924. A REJECTED MEASURE.

Hokitika Guardian, 3 November 1924, Page 2

The Guardian And Evening Star, with which is incorporated the West Coast Times. MONDAY, NOVEMBER 3rd, 1924. A REJECTED MEASURE.

( The Prime Minister Inis promptly with--1 drawn his measure intended to cover j the demand for an Agricultural Hank. , In this, discretion was no doubt the better part of valour. Several commercial and financial authorities wero interviewed by the ■Wellington “Post” on the Farm band Mortgage Associations llill. None of them had more than a newspaper precis of the measure to go upon in forming an opinion, hut judging by the reports all were quite clear that the measure was in the nature of pledging tlio whole jieoplo in the interests of a section. All agreed that the Bill, if it became law, would set up a vicious and dangerous precedent. One gentleman remarked: We could expect this kind of thing from Communists, but from the present Gorernment it is inexplicable. The country is to lend farmers, and farmers only, anything up to £1.30,000 for ten years, and to lend them that sum free of interest. The Associations will also lie immune from income-tax. This Bill is an outrago on the intelligence of people outside of the Legislative Council. Another authority on finance said: I would like to have the Bill, but so far as I have read its features through the papers I think it has not a chance of going through. For one thing, it will not satisfy the appetite for cheap money, and plenty of it. What is £150,000? That Is the limit to them. They want hundreds of thousands. I see that the money to be advanced is to be taken from the Consolidated Fund, that is, the whole community is to lend money to the fnrmers free of interest for the merchant, shopkeeper, and manufacturer? Again, if the Government is to lend money to these Associations free of interest, what about the Advances to Settlers and

other lending Departments of the Goveriiment who are charging (j per cent, for their loans to farmers? How and where will they stand? I notice that the applicant for a loan through these proposed Associations is to receive an advance up to 7ft per cent, of his capital value, hut he must take up a £5 share for every L' 100. Does he get that £.l deducted from Jiis advance? If he does, then he receives only (Jo per cent, of the capital value of the property mortgaged. Then what becomes of that (Jo share, and where docs it go when he ceases to he a shareholder, or on completion of payment of the advance made to him? I would like to carefully study the Bill itself before saying more than I have said already, hut on the face of it it seems an absurd proposal brought in for the purpose of catching the votes of farmers. I imagine that some of them are too wary birds to lie caught with such chaff. A banker expressed no opinion on the measure, lint lie remarked that if the Government would lend each of the banks trading in the Dominion Cloft,ooft on the .same terms as it pmposed to lend money to Farm l.airl Mortgage Associations. no doubt the banks would lie prepared to lend settlers money on the terms provided for in the Bill, and wouil gladly do so. “This legislation,” remarked another accepted authority on trade and finance, is out and out class legislation. The Government proposes a maximum of £1 fit),ooo, but will it stop there? Not a bit. If the Government intends to lend to one section of the people (the farmers) large sums of money free of interest, why not to every other section The whole idea is essentially Bolshevik in conception. To put it mildly it is class legislation of ihe worst possible description. I see no provision made for the payment of income-tax by these associations. Why not ? "Why should they escape and tils' individual taxpayer lie kept up to the mark? [f the hanks were immune from income-tax, I am assured that they could reduce their rate by 1 per cent. T wonder whether the Government is really in earnest about the Bill. It seems so utterly absurd, so glaringly a piece of out and out class legislation. and never intended to be proceeded with. At the meeting of the executive of the New Zealand Farmers’ I’nioii, Mr W. .T. Poison referred to the Bill. He said that lie did not know what induced Mr Massey to bring down tlio measure in the form lie bad. The Farmers’ Union bad not been eonsuited in tlio matter. The amounts sot aside under the Bill to meet the moratorium were altogether inn(lc(|iiate. The loans under the Bill would lie so limited as to lie of no use whatever to big producers. Unless the producers of the Dominion received Government support they would not get any money from overseas. Mr Poison added that he would lie prepared to accept anything which he thought would assist the producers, hut this Bill was not oven half a loan. After discussion it was resolved unanimously: “That this executive views with great regret the proposals published to-day with regard to agricultural credits, and are still hopeful that a majority of the House will agree to the report of the Committee of the House, which recommended powers being given to establish agricultural banks on the lines of the Danish institutions. Air Massey realised there was a good deal of opposition to the measure, and 110 has elected to withdraw the bill for the time being, and it will not lie proceeded with this session.