“NOT A BED OF ROSES”

Wairarapa Times-Age, 27 April 1939, Page 7

“NOT A BED OF ROSES”

PROSPECTS OF FARMING INDUSTRY HELP FOR STRUGGLING MAN NEEDED. SUBSIDY OR BOUNTY SUGGESTED. "From the way indications are pointing it is not all going to be a bed of roses for the sheep farmer,” observed the chairman, Mr J. M. James, at the annual meeting of the Masterton branch of the Farmers’ Union, held yesterday. Mr James urged that something should be done to assist the struggling farmer and he suggested .hat a subsidy . should be paid in cases of hardship rather than accept a guaranteed price for wool and meat. Mr James said that whether they liked it or not today was the- time of unionism. The Government had shown the way by offering the farmers compulsory unionism in their own ranks if they wanted it. It was only right and proper that the basic industry of the country should support itself through the medium of its union and. with unions all round them, farmers should stand together in one solid block. The union today had a numerical strength of 25,000 but there were 70,000 farmers eligible r to join. They knew of no other body today which could give a representative expression of opinion to any Government in power, but unfortunately the farmers did not realise the power they possessed. “We have reached the cross-roads and the question is what are we going to do about it?” added Mr James. Farmers today were facing one of the most difficult positions which had ever risen ,n New Zealand. Our prices would not meet the ever-increasing costs and all sections of the community would welcome proposals for closing the wide gap between prices and costs. Some people advocated a free exchange rate, the Government invited them to accept a guaranteed price for meat and wool, while the union suggested borrowing on behalf of the farming community. Restrictions on our meat exports were also in prospect, which would affect mainly our ewe mutton. Mr L. T. Daniell had introduced a stabilising scheme which was being favourably received, but it was only a single possible remedy for the position and the only alternative was that offered by the Government —guaranteed prices. PRICES DECLINING. Prices for all cur primary products were tending to decline. Wool and lamb prices were down and beef had also eased. The biggest drop, however, was for mutton and ewes. In past years our wool had averaged about lOd a lb., but this year it would be about 9£d. The drop of Jd a lb. would mean a loss of about £500,000 to the Dominion. He believed that wool woulu Le one of the factors that would help to keep the men on the land. There was a world shortage crt wool, which was selling readily at a price. In spite of what might be said of substitutes, he considered that wool at a price was preferred the world over. He did not favour the introduction of guaranteed prices for wool and meat, but at the same time he realised that something would have to be done to assist the industry. He did not think they would get anywhere with a guaranteed price, which would only add to the present burden of costs. A subsidy or bounty payable in cases- of proven individual hardship would probably be of more practical value to farmers. He was not unduly pessimistic but the slide had to be arrested somehow and the suggested guaranteed price for meat and wool did not appeal to him as a solution of the problem. Mr R. L. McKinstry said that the farmers were the only section of the community unprotected. If a guaranteed price were introduced it could not raise the cost of production without giving the producers some relief. Costs were already well ahead of prices and it was not for the farmers to ask where the money was coming from. Mr A. Ross asked what the essential difference was between a guaranteed price and a bounty as suggested by the chairman. Mr James said he had referred only to individual cases of hardship which would be treated on their merits. He did not favour a universal system of subsidy. Mr W. F. McLaren: “And if a man is an indifferent farmer the efficient man will have to pay the penalty.” Mr H. H. Mawley said he could see no good in pressing for a Government subsidy. The Government was already pretty hard-up and if they were going to pay the farmer more for his wool than the market value where was the money going to come from? Once the wool was placed in the hands of the Government costs would rise amazingly. Farmers had the remedy in their own hands and he considered they should stand on their own feet. An improvement in the international situation would be reflected in the demand and price for wool. He would say quite definitely that they should keep away from the Government and take steps to assist individual struggling farmers. The Provinbial Secretary, Mr James Watson, said the consensus of opinion at other branch meetings was that farmers would grab a guaranteed price with both hands if it could be proved that it would be an economically sound proposition from a national point of view. election of officers. The following officers were elected for the ensuing year:—Chairman, Mr J. M. James; vice-chairman, Mr J. C. Cooper; delegates to provincial executive. Sir William Perry, Messrs J. C. Cooper, A. Forsberg, R. E. Chamberlain, L. T. Daniell. R. L. McKinstry, W. James, C. C. Jackson, J. G, Wingate, and R. D. McKenzie; delegates to interprovincial conference, Messrs J. M. James, L. T. Daniell and C. C. Jackson. The following remits were adopted for consideration at the inter-provin-cial conference: "That a universal system of age marks for ewes be made compulsory,” and that “conference discuss a proposal by Mr C. C. Jackson to safeguard farmers against sheep stealing.”