FARMERS PROTEST

Wairarapa Times-Age, 27 April 1938, Page 8

FARMERS PROTEST

MR SAVAGE’S STATEMENT CHALLENGED GREATER RETURNS OFFSET BY COSTS AN OTAGO RESOLUTION (By Telegraph—Press Association). DUNEDIN, April 26. Various points concerning the farming community which were embodied in the speech delivered by the Prime Minister on April 20, provoked some discussion at the monthly meeting of the Otago Provincial Council of the Farmers’ Union today. Although some delegates were disposed to ignore the Prime Minister’s statements concerning the reason for the increased prosperity of the farming community and the figures he quoted to prove his argument, others contended that the council should record its protest against what they considered to be misrepresentation of the position. The following resolution was carried: — “This council is of opinion that the statement made by the Prime Minister from Wellington on April 20, regarding the improved position of farmers is not a fair statement and shows conclusively that the Prime Minister is not correctly informed as to the average conditions ruling throughout New Zealand. It is undeniable that there has been an increase in the returns for primary produce, but this is due to the increase in production and to the rise in prices overseas, and in all cases it has been offset by increased farming costs which have materially hindered recovery. These costs if they continue to rise at the present rate, will seriously imperil the primary industries.” The president, Mr R. H. Michelle, said that Mr Savage had quoted the greater use of fertilisers and agricultural machinery as proof that farmers were better off under the Labour Government than they had been under the previous administration, but actually many farmers were giving up cropping and were topdressing their land for grazing purposes, while as they could not get labour they were buying tractors and doing farm work themselves. The Prime Minister had also contended that the increase in totalisator figures at race meetings was another indication of the farmers’ prosperity, but Mr Michele declared that most of the racing patrons came from the cities, not 10 per cent of farmers having sufficient spare time to attend meetings. He would like to hear a discussion on the speech so that the executive could decide what to do about it. Mr James Begg: “I ignore it, Mr Chairman.” Mr Spoor said that anyone who knew the true position knew that the speech was “all rot.” Mr A. Renton dealt with the position of the dairy-farmer and said that the guaranteed income allowed for no provision for replacement of stock. Apparently a herd of cows was supposed to live for ever. The statement by the Prime Minister that the dairy-farmer had a right to present his claims to the Government did not hold water. Mr Stuart Sim said that Mr Savage had talked of a higher standard of living, but it was actually a high false* standard of living and the sooner that was realised the better. During the lean years farmers curtailed their expenditure and when conditions improved they set about making up leeway. If they had had a reasonable Government during the past two years they could have expended three times as much and would have employed more labour. The resolution was then carried.