SOME ILLUSIONS

Hokitika Guardian, 13 August 1929, Page 7

SOME ILLUSIONS

PINPRICKS AND POLITICIANS

(Nineteen Twenty-Eight Committee.)

So many pinpricks have been directed against the Nineteen Twenty-Eight Committee during the last month or two by people who have taken no pains to ascertain the character and purpose of this organisation that it seems desirable, if only in the interests of the public, to correct some of the more flagrant misrepresentations that have been set in circulation; To begi/i with, Mr W. J. Poison, M.P., in the course of his presidential address at the annual conference of tlie Farmers’ Union, mentioned two or three organisations, including the Committee, which he imr plied were prejudicing the interests of the Ifarmers by meddling with the Customs tariff. Then there was Mr David

Jones, M.P>, not to be outdone by the member for Stratford in his solicitude for the man on the land, roundly declared that the Committee was behind the movement for a reduction in the wheat and flour duties and that it had “ one of its members and supporters in the Cabinet advocating this. very course.”

FRUIT.AND POWER BOARDS. Then there was a resolution by the Hawke’s Bay Fruitgrowers’ Association deprecating “ with the greatest displeasure the attempts of the Nineteen Twenty-Eight Committee to undermine the operations of' the New Zealand Fruit Export Control Board by misleading 1 innuendoes and half-truths.” Again, several of the managers of the Power Boards have proclaimed abroad that “the Committee was endeavouring to prejudice the Government and the general public in order that it might be in a position to control prices fco the financial detriment df Power Hoards and At the end of- a long list of similar suggestions and assertions is an extract from a provincial newspaper in which the editor observes, apropos of nothing in particular, “it would appear that the Nineteen Twenty-Eight Committee owes something of an • apology to the fruit industry.” The apology is tenderd at once, whatever the. nature of the offence may have been. ■ With this much conceded it will bes.easy to refute the other charges brought against the Committee by over-zealous politicians and timorous employees.

KNOW BETTER,

it is obvious that Mr Poison was 'speaking at large—perhaps attempting a jest upon some of his, commercial friends—when he included the Committee among the organisations thatmight be seeking to oppress the farmers He knew better. Mr David Jones also knew perfectly well that-the Committee meddled in no way with party poliics or with tariffs, and confined itself scrupulously to h.is own leader’s slogan “Less Government in business 'and more business in Governmentbut !he Member for mid-Canterbury appears to have been carried away by his- party zeal and to have maligned both the Committee and the Minister for whom his strictures were intended. Vs for the Hawke’s Bay Fruitgrowers’ Association, it will suffice to say that the Committee wishes nothing but well to the Orchardists throughout the Dominion, whether they are independent •or subject to Absolute Control. It is -onsistent, however, and holds strongly that every producer should be free, within the laws of the land, to dispose of his own goods in his own way. FAIR COMPETITION. xiie case of the Power Boards presents somewhat greater difficulties on account of the State having sole charge fjJf the generation of electricity, but it rests on precisely the same fundamental principles as does every other case n which the State or the Local Body enters into competition with private enterprise. The managers of the power boards appear to have got it into their heads that the Committee is seeking to obtain control of prices for material, fittings, apliances and so forth n order that it may drive the boards out of business. The idea is too ludicrous for words. The Committee is not in the electric supply business. It feels strongly, however, that when the Power Boards take up the trading activities just indicated they should be subject to the same rates and taxes, the same rules and regulations and the same commercial obligations as are private dealers. If on these terms the private dealers could not bold their own with the State concerns, the position would have to be accepted. This, however, is a matter that must be reserved for later discussion.