POULTRY LICENSES

Rotorua Morning Post, Volume 2, Issue 375, 9 November 1932, Page 5

POULTRY LICENSES

("Post" Special C'bmmissioner.)

LATEST MEASURE ALL FOWL RUNS FOR PROFIT TO BE COMPELLED TO REGISTER HOUSE NOT VERY SERIOUS

Wellington, Tuesday. Elaborate provisions for th'e registration of poultry beepers in the Do- | minion are contained in a billTntroduced .in the House this afternoon. The bill is hased on the principle that, with certain exemptions, all persons who keep twelve or more fowls and sell eggs shall be registered. The bill states that ■ a poultry run shall be i deemed to be established when it is established for the purpose of providing eggs for sale, or if it is not established for th'at purpose, if any eggs produced are offered for sale. The fowl registration fee will be 2/6 where t there are under 100 fowls and an additional 2/6 for every additional 100. Keepers of less than twelve fowls are totally exempted while in trie case of persons receiving pensions under the Pensioris Act, and -persons who have been unemployed for three months or longer, the exemptio'n is increased to 25 fowls. Exemption is also provided for in the case of hardship.- One month is allowed for registration and failure to register is punish'able hy a fine of £1 and 2/6 for every week that the poultry run remains unregistered after the first month. Provision is made for the setting up of a Poultry Board, consisting of six persons including two Government representatives and four appointees of the New Zeaian'd Poultry • Association or such other . organisation of producers as may be approved. Functions of Board The functions of the board are to administer the act and develop the poultry industry. Out of fees, the expenses of the board are to he paid, as well as reimbursement of reasonahle expenses to the New Zealand Poultry Association for organising the pouitry industry before the commencement of a board. The board is also authorised to pay subsidies on eggs for export and to use its funds for any other purpose which it thinks fit. Tbe board may be dissolved if, on or before November 30, 1935, no less than 20 per cent. of the registered producers petition for a poll and that poll is carried hy a bare majority. Each producer is allowed oiily one vote. If the poll is carried, tbe Act remains in force until April 30, 1936, when the GovernorGenei'al may dispose of all assets. Discourage Bneeding Mr. H. S. Kyle (Government, Riccarton) expressed a fear that the bill would discourage poultry breedmg. What was wanted was something that would eitber give a bigger hen or a bigger egg. It was his intention to oppose the measure. Mr. J. A. Lee (Labour, Grey Lynn) said it appeared to him that the bill would he an unwarrantable interference with the respectable. people who kept a few fowls. "We will have a tomcat registration bill next," he said. Mr. J. A. Nash (Govt. Palmerston N.) said the poultry-keepers had been waiting for legislation for many years. "I thinlc our worst hopes are realised. The Government is going to make an attack on fowlhouses," said Mr. M. J. Savage (Labour, Auckland West). No Matter for Levity Th'a Minister of Agriculture (Hon. C. E. Macmillan) said the House was inclined to be facetious but the matter was of great importanee to poultry breeders. "I had hoped this bill would make some referenos to cock-fighting," said Mr. A. M. Samuel (Govt., Thames). He thought the Minister would be well advised to withdraw the measure straight away. Mr. A. Harris (Govt., Waitemata) said the great need for the poultry industry was cheap fowl wheat and he asked wbether the Minister would consider that aspect of the position. Mr. R. W. Hawke (Govt., Kaiap'oi) said- the object of the bill was to organise a marketing of eggs in both New Zealand and Great Britain. The owners -of small runs would he well repaid for the registration fee they would pay because the object of the bill was to stahilise prices. Mr.. W. Nash (Labour, Hutt) considered that the bill would develop the poultry industry and with perhaps a few minor qualifications, he supported the' measure. The, bill was necessary to place industry on a sound footing. After discussion, the bill was read a second time pro forma and referred to the Agricultural Committee.