FARMERS’ GRIEVANCE

Waikato Times, Volume 122, Issue 20491, 6 May 1938, Page 9

FARMERS’ GRIEVANCE

NEED FOR COMPENSATION ADDRESS BY COLONEL CLOSEY CASE FOR COMPENSATING PRICE That the farmers of New Zealand had a just grievance and were seeking redress by means of a compensating price was a statement made by Colonel S. J. E. Closey during the course of an address at St. Peter’s Hall last evening, when he presented the case for the compensating price, which he claimed, was the only equitable method of rewarding the farmer for the service he rendered. Mr W. Bourne presided over a good attendance. The word “compensating" indicated that there was a grievance and the farmers were seeking redress. The farmer sold all his produce on a low free-trade world price-level and was compelled to buy on a high protected New Zealand price-level. The farmer was a manufacturer, but what manufacturer could keep going by having to sell cheap and buy dear?

If every farmer realised what injustice he was suffering there would be such unrest that ultimately a remedy would be found. Had the dairy farmer proved efficient? That he had been efficient could be shown by the fact that within seven years production had been more than doubled, while the average production of dairy herds had also been materially increased. Despite the fact that the farmer had proved himself efficient, he was still worse off than other members of the community. Farmers Not Incompetent “We must attack the common conception “held in the cities that the farmer is incompetent," said Colonel Closey. “New Zealand manufacfacturers have said that farmers are pampered, but we claim that the farmer is the most competent business man in the community.” Farmers had to produce a perishable product that had to travel thousands of miles to compete on an open market, yet it had achieved a reputation for its consistency of quality. On the other hand, New Zealand manufacturers demanded tariffs to compete with articles coming from overseas.

New Zealand had adopted a protectionist policy, yet there was no justification l'or secondary industries other than the erection of factories and the provision of work- While the manufacturer was protected by high tariffs, the farmer was compelled to sell on a low market and buy on a high market. The primary producer was entitled to the difference to what was received on the open market in England and the part he had played in New Zealand’s total production. Wage Earners Compensated ■Other members of the community, continued Colonel Closey, were being compensated for increasing costs' by the Arbitration Court. The cost of living was raised by the duty applied on competing articles from overseas. The Arbitration Court then raised wages to allow for the dearer living and at once the manufacturers applied for another rise in duties. They were successful with the result that the cost of living once more rose. The Court had again raised and to the spiral continued. Th%t the farmers were solidly behind the movement to obtain redress, said Colonel Closey, was shown by the fact that of the 120,000 he had addressed during his lecture tour only 10 had voted against the compensating price.

City men wanted to know if they would be guarded if the compensating price were introduced, while the farmer, too, wanted to know whether all members of the community would benefit.

To prove that farming was worth saving, Colonel Closey went on to illustrate by the aid of charts the quantity of butter required to buy certain articles overseas. Imports had to be encouraged for it had to be remembered that every import was an order for exports. Yet the Dominion was being forced to buy New Zealand manufactured goods at sometimes twice the cost of the price of overseas goods. For instance New Zealand built ranges had been bought for the State houses in Auckland at £34 10s, while the same British article was available for £ls ss. With mass production the key to successful manufacturing, it was* absurd to foster small scale industries. Prosperity From Land “All wealth comes from the soil," yet there was an increasing expenditure oil such undertakings as railways and housing, whereas if the money expended on these two items were devoted to the land, production would be increased by one-seventh ol' its present figure. Farming provided the foundation of tiie Dominmn's economic structure and it was obvious that it was more expedient to strengthen tiie foundation than to add to ttie super structure. If the farmer were given a compensating price, it would not merely be a reward for the farmer, but it. would be a reward for every servicing agent. if farming collapsed, everyone would suffer, while if farming expanded, everyone would benefitAt the conclusion of Ids address, 1 lie speaker was called upon to answer a large number of questions, which evoked a highly interesting discussion.

On the motion of Mr K. M. Masters, a resolution approving Die principles of the compensating price, was carried unanimously.