SCATHING CRITICISM OF REVISED TARIFF

Sun (Auckland), Volume I, Issue 155, 21 September 1927, Page 16

SCATHING CRITICISM OF REVISED TARIFF

“MOVE TO SPLIT FARMERS” Scathing criticism was levelled at the Government last evening by members of the Auckland Provincial Executive of the New Zealand Farmers’ Union, on the question of tho proposed tariff amendments. The question first came before the meeting in the form of a communication from Mr. T. H. Pearson, Opotiki, protesting against the reduction ip the duty on maize. Capt. Colbeck contended that while the Government maintained the duty on wheat it should not have taken it off maize. Other members supported this contention, none, however, supporting the general principal of protection. Capt. Rushworth said that under the old schedule of protection it worked out that on the average area under maize in the Dominion the country was subsidising the industry to the extent of £3 an acre. Mr. E. A. Robinson said that the move was on the lines of others made lately. The Paterson scheme for subsidising the pork industry was another scheme to split the farmers. Most of the maize imported came either from Java or from Africa, where it was grown by cheap black labour. It was decided to protest against the reduction on the grounds that it was manifestly unfair to remove the protection from one section of the community while it was kept on for the wheat growers. “FARMER SOLD TO BIG INTERESTS”

Further discussion on the proposed tariff amendments took place when Mr. R. Feisst moved a resolution expressing an emphatic protest against the proposed tariff amendments on the grounds that it would be inevitably reflected in an increase in the cost of living.

It seemed, he said, deplorable that a small section of the community should be protected at the expense of national interests. The Government was not prepared to face big interests and had again sold the farmer because he had not sufficient political pull. Capt. Colbeck, in seconding the resolution, said that the w'hole schedule was inconsistent and the cost of living would undoubtedly advance. The president, Mr. A. Ross, said that the saddest part about the whole question was that the Government seemed full of the idea that, by increasing and manipulating the tariff, ** would make for greater prosperity. The resolution was carried.