EXPORT PRODUCE

Wairarapa Times-Age, 4 December 1940, Page 3

EXPORT PRODUCE

DEBATE ON MARKETING REPORT POSITION OF THE DAIRY FARMER. MR. NASH DEFENDS GUARANTEED PRICE. (By Telegraph—Press Association.) WELLINGTON, This Dav. “The Export Marketing Division during last season handled more than £62,000.000 worth of goods, expressed in New Zealand money,” said Mr. Bar clay (Government, Marsden) when opening the debate on the Marketing Department reports in the House of Representatives last night. The time limit for speakers was specially extended to 30 minutes on account of the importance of the subject, and urgency was taken. “Exports of dairy’ produce for last season were £25.499,000." Mr. Barclay continued. “Meat products exported amounted to £19,500,000, wool to £16,379,000, and tallow, woolly sheepskins, scheelite and other items ac • counted for the balance. The total was £62,569,000. It is a tremendous lot of produce.” Mr. Doidge (Opposition, Tauranga): “You should be grateful to the farmer." Mr. Kidd (Opposition, Waitaki): “He is not grateful to the Government.” Mr. Barclay: “I think most of the farmers are grateful to the railwaymen and seamen and all others who help get their produce to market.” “The Minister of Marketing, Mr, Nash, has been accused up and down this country of not taking interested parties into consideration,” Mr. Barclay continued. “He has considered all of them in the same fair way that he did with the wool-growers. He is the man who has done more than anybody else to bring stability into the sale of our produce, and to the dairyfarmers.”

Mr. Polson (Opposition, Stratford) : “Did you say stability or debility?” Mr. Barclay said that the Government intended to continue with the guaranteed price principle, no matter what the Opposition or the Farmers’ Union might say. It would continue, too, after the war was over. Increases shown in production in the first three months of this season were also mentioned by Mr. Barclay. He said that butter production had risen by 27 per cent, and cheese by 60 per cent. PRICES AND COSTS. The dairy-farmer’s trouble was that he was receiving 1914 prices for his goods and paying 1940 costs, said Mr, Broadfoot (Opposition, Waitomo). Mr. Barclay had said the Government had put millions of money into the fathers’ pocket, Mr. Broadfoot added, but millions every year had been taken out of the farmers’ pocket and given to less worthy members of the community. The Prime Minister, Mr. Fraser: “Who is less worthy?” Mr. Broadfoot: “People \Vho are not working the number of hours the farming community does and who are getting more wages. They are taking money they have not earned.” The- guaranteed price was a glittering name for an equalisation scheme. Mr. Broadfoot said. But costs had been increasing for five years and under the present regime would continue to mount higher. “We were told that the guaranteed price had no relation to overseas realisations,” Mr. Broadfoot added. “We were deluded by that beautiful theory of insulation. That theory was cast overboard and we have the Minister now saying that prices overseas were a factor that had to be considered in the main in fixing the guaranteed price.”

THE FARMER’S EQUITY.* The farmer’s equity in his farm was being built up today, said Mr. Ben Roberts (Government, Wairarapa), who added that he was not going to say that all the farmer's troubles were over, because they never would be. It was clear that the personnel of farmers’ organisations, such as the Farmers’ Union, the dairy conference, and the Opposition in the House, would throw over the present marketing policy at the first opportunity to the interests which had operated before. The Government had brought stability to the dairy industry, and its great object now was to bring about stability between the different sections of the community. Mr. Goosman (Opposition, Waikato), said that four year’s operation of the Government’s marketing. and guaranteed price policy had resulted in the dairy industry being mortgaged to the extent of £2,000,000, on which the industry was paying interest. The guaranteed price had been used as an excuse for raising wages tq, workers covered by awards. The guaranteed price could not be anything else but an equalisation fund. “I would advise the producers to regain control of their industry at the first opportunity,” said Mr.- Goosman, “for .they can run their business better than any Labour Government.”

THE MINISTER’S DEFENCE. A defence of the guaranteed price scheme was made by the Minister of Marketing. Mr. Nash. He said he was satisfied that the dairy farmer was better off under the guaranteed price procedure of the past four years than he would have been without the procedure. The testimony of New Zea land's competitors was that the organisation of the marketing machine was near perfection. On that record he was content to let the farmers judge when they knew the facts. A detailed review of the scheme and its operation was given by Mr. Nash, who said factory costs had declined, interest rates were not higher and fertiliser costs were guaranteed. Discussing post-war difficulties, the Minister said that though New Zealand had some arrangement with the British authorities for the agreement to continue till there was an element of stability in the market at Home, the Dominion might be faced with abnormal output and abnormal supplies of margarine. Those were the days the Government would meet and when the guaranteed price would require again to be given some consideration. Mr. Polson (Opposition. Stratford): “What do you mean by that?” Mr. Nash: “If there is an abnormal fall in the price of butter overseas wc would have to protect the dairy farmer against it by paying something to his costs and his own living.”