The Sun 42 WYNDHAM STREET AUCKLAND SATURDAY, FEBRUARY 15, 1930 A LESSON FROM A SMALL NATION

Sun (Auckland), Volume III, Issue 898, 15 February 1930, Page 10

The Sun 42 WYNDHAM STREET AUCKLAND SATURDAY, FEBRUARY 15, 1930 A LESSON FROM A SMALL NATION

THERE is more land actually and potentially available for dairy l P r °ducti° n 311 the Auckland Province than there is in the whole of Denmark—the leading rival of New Zealand as regards the export of butter and cheese to Great Britain. The area on winch the Danish farmer prospers is 9,000 square miles smaller than this provincial district and 87,000 square miles less in extent than the size of the Dominion without its outer .islands and dependencies. And yet Denmark, with fewer cows and not nearly so many milking machines, produces over twice as much butter and one-third more of cheese. these facts are worth noting against a statement made the other day by an official of the Dairy Produce Board that Danish butter production had increased only by 29 per cent, during the period that New Zealand production had increased 400 per cent the comparison, no doubt, gave cause for justifiable pride, but it did not tell the whole story of development in Denmark. Within the period of review the Danish people not only maintained their lead in the quality of dairy production, but they developed to a remarkable extent as well their manufacturing industries. In that prosperous corner of Europe, only a little larger than Canterbury though not as large as Otago and Southland together, there are now over 89,000 factories and shops employing 392,000 workers. Close on 27,000 factories use mechanical power. In this country, six times the size of Denmark, there are only 5,116 factories, including those for the production of butter and cheese, employing 81,000 persons, proprietors included. What has been the secret of Denmark’s consistent supremacy in dairy production together with a steady expansion of manufacturing industries? Climate, farming knowledge, or better polities? Climatic influence can be eliminated. New Zealand is incomparably favoured as to weather. Not even Lord Bledisloe, a prominent expert, could make grass grow any better or make it more nourishing for dairy herds in Denmark than may be done for New Zealand pasture. And there is no difficulty here about drought. Rain is so abundant that even the ruin of a test cricket match by an untimely deluge can be forgiven as a timely gift to Waikato dairy farmers. There is no doubt at all, however, as to the advantages of Denmark in respect of farming skill. Less than four million inhabitants, of that little country maintain with x - eady money no fewer than twenty-two agricultural schools, to say nothing about their maintenance of 267 excellent technical schools. Here, a tremendous fuss has been made over the establishment of an up-to-date agricultural college in each of the two main islands. The Auckland Province, in which the whole of Denmark could be located without adding much to the confusion of town-plan-ning schemes, does not possess an agricultural school. And yet it contains close on 75,00(1 dairy farmers, and enough unoccupied or uncultivated laud to provide farms for twice as many more producers! Some day, perhaps, the third of the Dominion’s population which lives complacently in this province will want to know how its full score of representative politicians earn thenwages and a bonus besides. As to the question of better politics, there may be scope for a wide difference of ojjinion, but Denmark has at least one distinctive and enviable advantage over this country. Danish Ministers of the Crown are held responsible individually and collectively for their administrative acts, and if they should be impeached and found guilty of wrong-doing their punishment may be severe. In any case they can only be pardoned by the House of Commons—a law that strengthens the Opposition. In that alone there seems to be a lesson from one small nation to another. Here, State administrators, good and bad, wise or otherwise, are as a law unto themselves. They can and do ignore Parliament, while their errors, like those of a nobler profession, are laid away and forgotten. Whatever else Danish politicians may fail to do (for the tribe is weak all the world over), they certainly do more for the promotion of both agricultural and manufacturing industries than is done politically in this ill-governed land, where administrators and legislators excel best in always talking about what they intend to do this year, next year, sometime—but never. In Denmark, industrialists are encouraged by fiscal protection and technical instruction to manufacture goods in abundance so that the nation need not depend almost entirely on the success of agricultural production for prosperity. Small farmers—a multitude of them—are given all the benefits of political aid without the disadvantages of stupid political control. Of course, allowance must be made without stint for Denmark’s advantage in its nearness to the world’s best markets for products of the laud, and also for its long start in the form of a thousand years’ preparation. In that period, however, there must have been many mistakes made and much to learn. Is it not the duty of young countries to profit by the errors and acquired knowledge of older countries and go unerringly forward to similar and even greater development? With only 3,000,000 head of cattle, Denmark holds fifth place in the world for dairy production. New Zealand, with 3,530,811 head of cattle, is only ninth in the list. In that, as in the rapid expansion of Denmark’s manufacturing industries, there is for this Dominion a lesson from a small nation.