A FARMERS' PARTY

Taranaki Daily News, Volume LIII, Issue 243, 20 February 1911, Page 3

A FARMERS' PARTY

DISCUSSED BY TARANAKI EXECUTIVE. At Thursday's meeting of the Taranaki Executive of the New Zealand Farmers' Union a proposal from the Auckland Executive in reference to the formation of a Farmers' Party was riscu.ssed. In response to a request from the Dominion Conference that. the Auckland Executive be asked to formulate their proposal more fully, the circular was read, from the Auckland Executive:—

"In compliance with this resolution the Auckland Executive, with a view to i avoid misunderstanding, desires to state I in the first place what the' proposed farmers' party is not. It is not desired or proposed that the farmers, of New Zealand should attempt to elect and. send to Parliament members on the same footing as the present recognised parties —Government, Opposition or Labor, whose objective is to obtain such a majority that they can form an executive who'will carry on the whole public business of the Dominion in accordance with their political views. Here we would point out that the New Zealand Farmers' Union has always laid down a positive ' rule that party politics are absolutely barred in the debates on decisions of the Union, and therefore in the Farmers' Union are to be found many strong and staunch, supporters of the parties at present in Parliament, but who are earnestly and amicably working together to strengthen the Union, and thereby benefit the whole farming community. The Fanners' Party it is now desired to form is a combination which has for its object the return to Parliament of members for country' constituencies who, first, are bona fide members of the Fanners' Union, and unreservedly accept the platform of the Union; (2) who have a competent knowledge of the needs and interests of the agricultural and pastoral community; (3) who will engage themselves to specially watch all proposed legislation which wijl affect the farmers or the man on the land, and bind themselves to vote unitedly for or against such legislation, independently, and in entire disregard of how it affects the recognised political parties at present in Parliament, or the fate of any Minister, while on all other questions, which do' not particularly affect farmers,' as such party men '"would be free to vote either with the. •Covernment. or Opposition, as to each man seems wisest and best, always desiring and expecting that members of the Farmers' Party would strive to administer purely party feeling in Parliament,, 'and endeavor fairly to meet the wishes and just aspirations of any other section or parlv in the .House." ■Mr. Thomson understood 'there "was some difference in the Canterbury and Auckland movements. )

■ .Mr. Davidson moved that the proposal be referred back to the Auckland Executive for further consideration. Mr. Virgin moved as an amendment that, it be referred to the branches, for their favorable Consideration.

Mr. Thomson said that they should .affirm the principle that fanners'shouhl and would- support men for Parliament who would attend to their interests. Mr. Marfell seconded. He was satisfied that the fanners were very much divided, and having some men amongst them who had very strong political views, he recognised that there might be some ; objection to the proposal.they were considering, but they would have to deal with this matter, and the proper way was to refer it to' the branches so that it could be fully thrashed out. He-did not think that the Farmers' Party would .ever be strong enough to hold power, but they could be strong enough to effectively voice the wishes of the farmers.

The chairman said the movement which had been instituted was drastic as compared with what they had attempted in the past, but the effect would be to give' weight and prominence to farming interests. At present the fact that members ■were pledged to party caused men whose sympathies might lie with the fanner to vote against what would be for his advancement. The farmer was represented ;by no political party, though the Opposition had usually been regarded as supporting the farmer more than the Go-1 veniment. He himself did not think there was very much difference, but those who had given pledges to the farmers had so far been true to those! pledges. All that would be asked of! those supported by the Union would be I that on all questions affecting the farm-, er they must vote wifa tile farmer.

Mr. Lambie was in favor of the proposals, and saw nothing in them which could not lie adopted.