SUBSIDISED FARM SCHEME HELD UNSOUND

Manawatu Times, Volume 64, Issue 303, 23 December 1939, Page 8

SUBSIDISED FARM SCHEME HELD UNSOUND

Defeatist Attitude DUNEDIN, Dec. 21. The No. 4 B scheme, by which men are subsidised by the Government for farm development work, was the subject of considerable discussion at the monthly meeting to-day of the Otago Provincial Council of the Ne wZealand Farmers’ Union. A motion advocating modification with the aim of enabling farmers to take full advantage of it, was heavily defeated and the meeting later carried the following motion, which fully illustrated its attitude toward the scheme: “While we recognise that the 4 H scheme is of assistance to some farmers by enabling them to get some useful work done that would otherwise be neglected, as permanent policy it is utterly unsound, and if it should be developed and extended it will ultimately impose a crushing burden on exporting industries, some sections of which are at present perhaps reason ably sound.* The discussion began after the Dunedin placement officer, Mr T. A. White, had explained the No. 4 F scheme, designed to advance the training of farm labourers. “Many farmers are doing what they and their families can do, and leaving the rest undone,” one member said. “Farm labourers cannot earn the money that the farmer has to pay them. Farmers are finding experienced labour expensive enough in all conscience, and they cannot consider inexperienced labour. It is not generaly appreciated that inexperienced labour can do great damage to teams and implements. “It is disheartening to appreciate the defeatist attitu'2 in support of this scheme,” said Mr James Begg. The Governmnt’s policy was bringing farmers into a position that they could not meet their expenses. Their alternative when they reached that stage was to go on the dole, which was what advocacy of this scheme meant. “But we can’t have the whole community on the dole,” he continued. “There must be a base somewhere and the farming industry must be that base for this country. The scheme is unsound, and it just means that the farmer is being induced to sell himself to the Government.”