71 



Mr. Or win mentions the fact that we have a lot of waste land owing to 

 hedges you can do away with hedges under co-operative farming, 

 just the same as under large farm production ; that is a question merely 

 of detail, and is not affected in the ultimate utilisation of the land to 

 the best advantage. The objection that implements co-operatively 

 used would be wanted by different people in the co-operative society 

 at the same time is answered by the fact that just the same machinery 

 for the same acreage would be needed on a large farm. In very many 

 parts where reasonable effect has been given to the Small Holdings Acts 

 the co-operative use of machinery has been and is being worked to 

 advantage. He also contends that, even with co-operative use of 

 machinery, during a large part of the year the machinery would be 

 idle it would be just as idle on the large farm. Generally speaking, 

 the two things that seem to make the paper hardly the best solution 

 for our present problem is that farming is quite a different undertaking 

 from all other enterprises because of the effect of contact with the land 

 upon the worker, and that whatever benefit can be got by large farming 

 can be got by co-operative farming properly organised. 



I think that the failure of farming is caused by the lack of permanency 

 in tenure, and it is no good endeavouring to find a solution under private 

 control ; it is absolutely futile so long as an ordinary person can use 

 or misuse the land in our restricted area to suit his own whims, fancies, 

 or financial outlook, regardless of the welfare of the people. Our 

 first care should be to restore the land to the nation no artificial rules 

 or orders of this system or that policy will be effective unless the nation 

 owns and governs its own area and the policy is dictated from that 

 standpoint. 



I think the principle behind the large farm idea is wrong : a nation 

 should not organise its agricultural industry on the basis that somebody 

 is going to make a big profit, but it ought to organise its food pro- 

 duction on the lines of its national needs, for the building up of its 

 national life and to keep us together as a nation. It seems to me that 

 we are pottering about and tinkering with half-measures instead of 

 getting to the dead bottom level, making the land serve the people 

 and not pay John Smith 10 per cent, or 20 per cent. 



Then with regard to the question of housing : it is perfectly true 

 what the lecturer said. The farmer cannot afford to build and get 

 only Is. or 2s. 6d. rent but why cannot he ? Because the foolish 

 fellow does not pay sufficient wages. He wants wages low, so that 

 he can put his produce on the market and get a good profit ; and if 

 he invests money in cottages he also wants a good return on that. 

 The whole thing is preposterous, and, as a nation, we have to realise 

 this one great essential at any rate if we are going to continue as a 

 nation that the land must be the people's and must be used for the 

 people ; and that the principle of production for private profit must go, 

 and the policy be introduced, whether it be co-operative or otherwise, 

 of giving the man who is doing the actual work the direct reward 



