FARMERS’ UNION MEETS.

Shannon News, 11 December 1928, Page 4

FARMERS’ UNION MEETS.

REMITS DISCUSSED. v The Manawatu provincial "executive of the New'Zealand Farmers' Union met on Saturday, Mr. O. P. Lynch*, presiding. Also present were Messrs J. Balsillie, H. Bowling, J. Gloyh, B. Gr. Gower, F. Maul, C. P. J&psei;, .H. Denton, H. McLeavey and A., McLeavey and H. Bond. The Dominion executive requested that provincial executives discuss a list of remits forwarded, and to send 1 replies to be further discussed at the meeting of the Dominion executive on February 6th. The first remit was: “That trading departments controlled by the State or local authorities should be subject to taxation, rating, license and other fees and dues, on the same basis as private enterprise, and that each such State' or local authority trading department should be compelled to publish an annual balance sheet, prepared in accordance- with, recognised commercial principles.”

The chairman said that it was hard to know what State departments were aimed at. The remit could apply to State mines and omnibuses and shipping. There were also experimental farms.

Mr. Maul said that experimental 'farms provided no competition. It was only where competition affected private enterprise that the remit should apply. Mr. Lynch was of the opinion that if some of the Government departments furnished balance-sheets, there would be many of the employees out of jobs. Mr. Maul: Every. department submits a balance-sheer 1 to the Government.

The opinion was expressed by Mr. Jensen that the, union was interfering' with politics to too great an extent. The Union should continue to direct its efforts to further the farmer’s interests The whole trouble was that the Union took too many matters upon it-self—-matters which should be left to the local bodies concerned. He moved that the Union leave the matter ic abeyance. •

Mr. Maul: The Government, should not claim advantages that are not available to private enterprise. That means unfair competition. We would be quite justified in passing an opinion. Mr. H. McLeavey said that, he was in agreement wdth Mr. Jensen's suggestion. Any taxation paid by the Government only reacted upon the fanners.

Mr. Jensen whs of the opinion that, as far as rating was concerned, the local bodies should continue in their efforts to get the Government to pay rates. . It was decided to take no action in the matter. Pork Export. Discussing the pork subsidy, Mr. Gower said that the point he-did not like was that the bounty was paid only to the shipper, and not to those who sold locally. The general opinion was that there is a market at Home for porkers, but not for baconers, a plentiful supply of bacon pigs being available from countries more handy to England. Mr. Lynch suggested that the export could be managed through the dairy companies on the same lines as butter and cheese. It was pointed out by several members that the companies did not have the markets on anything like a necessary scale. The present prices available were thought to be all that could be obtained until the trade was stabilised. It was finally decided to refer the matter to the Pig Breeders' Association so that the bonus and export system be fully discussed. The association is to be asked to send its views to the Union.

Valuations of Land. Rural land valuation was .discussed at length, three remits being received. The Southland branch suggested that “it be a recommendation to the Dominion executive that a move be

made towards the setting up of a committee of experts evidence and Submit recommendations for a uniform and equitable basis of valuation of rural lands.”

Tile 'South Canterbury branch recommended “that the Government be asked to appoint three local farmers to act in conduction with the local Government valuer when valuing lands for taxation purposes. Moreover, that the .valuation of lands be made on the of the farms and that the valuations be made at some reasonable time throughput the Dominion.”

The South Taranaki branch notified that it had u’Ccorded its “ emphatic--pro-test againSt the present ‘unfair method of assessing the value of the laud cn the selling value,' particularly in view of the unsettled state of market conditions and values.” The branch considered that the correct basis of assessment of land values should be the productive value of land average over a period of, say, the preceding seven years.

Mr. Lynch said that, as far as he could see, the matter was in the hands of valuers. Unless some definite basis was arranged, inequitable rating, would bo unavoidable. It would be a good idea if county council's published rating rolls l ! o,r public inspection. If this were done, uniformity of values could be obtained, and friction avoided. It was wholly unfair that two men, with the same class of land should be valued on yerv different scales. Mr. Lynch said that a basis of valuation of sheep land in Southland was £6 for the first sheep per a<cre, £5 for the-second, and £4 for the third sheep. This~gavo a rating according to capacity.

Mr. C. IV Jensen said that it did not appeal to him to tax the man who made improvements. Higher production was necessary, as well as a greater population, but it could not be done if a farmer were taxed out of proportion to his ’production. He had every sympathy, with the valuers, but the Valuation Act required alteration to give farmers security over their improvements. The Dominion executive should bring forward a proposal and \ committee should be set up by the Government to deal with the matter.

It was decided to support the Southland remit and to add to it that the Government be asked to set up a committee.