FARMERS AND POLITICS.

Putaruru Press, Volume VI, Issue 226, 1 March 1928, Page 6

FARMERS AND POLITICS.

CONTROVERSIAL SUBJECT. Union Members Air Views. The keen interest taken by farmers in politics, particularly at the present juncture in view of the forthcoming elections, was manifest at Saturday’s meeting of the Morrinsville branch of the New Zealand Farmers’ Union, when members spoke in no uncertain tones of, their opinion of (he present Government and aired their views on the political situation. “ I do not know whether politics is a proper matter for the branch to discuss,” said the president, Mr. J. Allen. “It is a very controversial subject, particularly among farmers, and if the discussion gets properly under way we may be here all night.” However, a vote was taken, and the president invited members to give their opinions. Mr. M. E. Banowclough set the ball rolling. He said that he supported the Country Party because it was based on an economic basis. The platform did not seek any special privileges for the farming community but only asked that the farming community be put on an even footing with other sections of the community. Under the present administration practically the whole of the secondary industries were supported by protective tariffs. This was in some measure due to the necessity for introducing new industries into the country. However, he maintained that a direct bonus would be more desirable, when the value of the industries could be better gauged. Labour said that without protective tariffs there would be sweated labour. What of the primary industries ? They were not supported by preferential tariffs, and, in fact, carried some of them on their backs. Labour favoured increasing duties on goods that came into •: competition with goods in the country and decreased protective tariffs on goods not manufactured in the country. This was economically unsound. The Reform policy was very little different. It had strong party funds, a large proportion of which was drawn from companies. Obviously these concerns must get some return for their “ investment,” and the question was, who was paying for these returns ? Mr. Barrowclough contended that the interests who supplied the sinews of war dictated the policy of the party they were instrumental in putting into power. At the last election a majority of farmers voted Reform, but they had little opportunity of selecting their delegate or defining the Reform platform. The party had ignored the wishes of the dairy companies and Farmers’ Unions in a number of matters, and there could be no more representative body of farmers than these concerns.

Mr. Barrowclough strongly urged support of the Country Party. The candidate was elected on the preferential system and there were no monied interests to dictate a policy. Mr. F. Seifert said he was in the same box as a number of other voters. He hardly knew which way to turn. Politically things were in a bad way, and the difficulty was how to improve them. The greatest crime of the Government was overexpenditure. Another point was the inflation of values in the towns, which reacted seriously on the farming community. He maintained that the reason was protective tariffs. If any party came forward with planks in its platform to reduce taxation by decreased expenditure and reducing preferential tariffs he would support it. He did not know what the Country Party proposed doing but if it advocated these points he would support it. He was watching the trend of events and it was very probable that he would throw in his lot with the Country Party.

Mr. J. E. Leeson said it was well known that any party in power for 12 or 13 years was inclined to run to seed and lose its initiative and progressive policy. Reference was made to the fact that between £8,000,000 and £9,000,000 was collected through indirect taxation through the tariffs, and which was contributed to equally by all. As a class the farmers were not hardly taxed, although he would naturally like to see taxation reduced. Land settlement was most important. All sorts of excuses were put forward by the Minister of Lands, but in other countries a progressive policy was adopted. A sound settlement policy would be welcomed, and any Government that would come forward with such

a measure could be assured of support. Speaking personally, he was at present “on the fence,” and would watch with interest the coming election.

Referring to the question raised by Mr. Leeson of where the money would come from if tariffs were reduced, Mr. Barrowclough said the Country Party was opposed only to protective tariffs, and he pointed out England as an example of a country that collected a huge revenue from tariffs not necessarily protective. “ A great majority of the community appears to be living beyond its means,” said Mr. G. Pirrit. “ Large sums go out of the country for motor cars and benzine, while the inflation of town values has seriously affected the economic position. Any Government that could remedy this state of affairs and reverse the position by making exports exceed imports would be welcome,” he said. Mr. J. L. Faulkner said that if the present Government was not supported there was a grave risk of splitting the votes between the two new parties and letting Labour in.

Mr. J. B. Thomas said that, while agreeing with much of the criticism levelled by various speakers at the Government, he was in accord with the contention of Mr. Faulkner. By striving to get another party started the farming community might get itself into a worse position. The president said he was a Reform supporter, and he had never been able to see what the farmers had to growl at. Referring to rural securities, he said that the Act recently introduced would induce large investing concerns to take up bonds and thus indirectly help the farmers. On the point of taxation the farmers had no income tax to pay— Mr. S. Ross : Because they have no income. (Laughter.) Continuing, the president said it was perfectly ridiculous to lay the troubles of farmers at the door of the present Government. The Government gave every encouragement to farmers, but for unsuccessful farming the farmer had only himself to blame.

Mr. Ross : You agree with the Minister of Finance’s policy, then ? The President : Most decidedly. Mr. Ross made reference to the Arbitration Court, which he accused of causing a large amount of the present unemployment. Mr. S. Ferguson said he had in the past always supported the Reform Party, but he had recently come to the conclusion that the farmers were not getting very much further ahead. They were improving their farms and herds and increasing their production. The protective tariffs were supporting the consumers at the expense of the producers. If these were decreased the farmers could afford to employ more labour, thus increasing production, which would result in more revenue and less unemployment. At present the farmers voted for all parties and were not solid. If the Country Party’s policy could be amended to suit the majority of farmers he thought it would exercise a considerable amount of power. Asked for his views, Mr. P. S. Philpott said he was “ not going to let the cat out of the bag. The ballot is supposed to be secret, and I do not think one’s views should be aired in public,” he said. Mr. W. Aitken expressed himserf similarly. The meeting then passed on to other business.