WELLINGTON TOPICS

Hokitika Guardian, 9 August 1926, Page 4

WELLINGTON TOPICS

DAIRY CONTROL. AMENDING BILL THROUGH HOUSE. (Special to “ Guardian.”) .WELLINGTON, August G. Tlie fight over the Dairy Produce Export Control Amendment Bill, which had engaged the attention of the House of Representatives during the greqtpr part of the week, ended rather tamely early last night when the opponents of the measure accepted the inevitable and allowed the third reading to be taken without debate. The Prime -Minister held to his promise to leave members of his party free to vote as they pleased on the Bill, and' in the two crucial divisions—that on Mr H. M. Campbell’s amendment providing for a general election of the hoard before the enforcement of control, and that on .Mr J. A. Nash’s amendment to eliminate the age basis of voting—several Reformers sided with the out-and-out opponents of the measure. The Labour Opposition threw in its lot with the great body of Reformers in defeating .Mr Campbell's amendment, but joined with the Liberals and dissenting Reformers in supporting Mr Nash’s attempt to eliminate the tonnage system of voting. It is expected that the Bill will have a comparative ’ smooth passage through the Legislative Council; but it is quite probable amendments will ho introduced in “the other place ” with' a view to mollifying some of the interests that are protesting against “ compulsion ” and “ confiscation.” The weight of opinion in Parliament, however, is obviously overwhelmingly in favour of control.

WITHIN THE PARTY. The little tilt between the Hon AY. Noswoithy and Mr H. AL Campbell during the fervid hours of the Control debate has .aroused more discussion in the city than has the butter problem itself. The Postmaster-General invited the retort he got by saving that in all his parliamentary experience he never before had known of such a proposal as the one put forward by the member for Hawke’s Bay and lie was extremely sorry that it had come from a member on his own side of the House. It would be a grossly dishonourable thing, he declared, warming to his subject, for any Parliament to go behind the back of the board and sweep it away in one act. Air Campbell strongly resented the suggestion of the Minister. That gentleman was much mistaken if he thought the member for Hawke’s Ra.v had been sent to the House to

support the members of any hoard or to keep them in a comfortable job. He had been elected to .represent the farmers of his district and to do the best he could for all his constituents, and he was not going to ho prevented discharging his obligation by a Minister or by anyone else. The PostmasterGeneral’s suggestions were outrageous and ihe threw them back in his face. Had the Minister known the member for Hawke’s Bay at all well ho would not have expected a less spirited reply.

A FURTHER PROTEST. The “ Evening Post,” writing before the final passage of the Bill in tlie House, made a further protest against the principle of compulsion. “If producers voluntarily continue to agree to control marketing by majority rule.” it said, “then the minority has no cause for complaint. But the dairy control measure is not voluntary com. bination. All lmtter and cheese exporters have been compelled to come in. Their right to dispose of their produce as they think lit has boon taken away from them. This compulsion is a new principle, and a most dangerous one, much more dangerous than the Reform Government and the farmers (both opponents of Socialism) i realise. Speakers failed to show in the House last Anight that this dangerous course w.as even justified by arguments ot expediency. Indeed, the Minister of Agriculture by quoting the good effect of the Board’s operations upon the London market last season (when there was no, compulsion) submitted the strongest argument for postponing the operation of compulsion. No speaker showed that the emergency, for which the compulsory powers were granted; hail arisen or was likely to arise.

There is every reason at present lor urging most strongly that ftp Dairy Hoard should take further time to consider its course.” This expresses the great weight of commercial and financial opinion here, hut apparently the only hope of delay now lies in the approaching appeal to the Courts. RAIL OR LOAD. In the Railway Statement presented to the House yesterday the Prime Minister makes a very interesting statement of his views in regard,, to the competition between the Railway Department and private, enterprise. “ I

desire to state as a declaration of my personal policy,” he says, “ that whenever this can he done I propose that the Railway Department shall undertake the work, either itself or hy arrangement with private enterprise. In doing so T recognise that it may he •said that the Railway Department is trenching on the field of private enterprise, hut a. careful analysis of the situation seemed to me to show clearly .the fallacy of this argument. The traffic, in the first place, was railway traffic, and in keeping the traffic to itself the Railway Department is but holding wliat Ims always been its own and is not taking; the traffic that originally belonged to private carriers. The advantages of large-scale work have up to the present lain with the railways because of the extent of their field of operation, and I think the same considerations, though possibly in a less degree, might he hold to justify the Railway Department in endeavouring to- undertake at least such road transport work as will enable it to reduce its working costs.” The Minister proceeds to talk of co-operation and co-ordination, hilt meanwhile both bus proprietors and lorry proprietors are alarmed lest still worse things are in store for them.