WELLINGTON TOPICS.

Auckland Star, Volume LVII, Issue 7, 9 January 1926, Page 13

WELLINGTON TOPICS.

SECONDARY INDUSTRIES. ENCOURAGEMENT REQUIRED. DAIRY CONTROL BOARD. (From Our Special Correspondent.) \VELLIN T GTON, January 8There is a growing feeling here that many of the secondary industries of the Dominion are not receiving the encouragement they should from either the public or the Government. The primary industries, for the time being, seem to be occupying the whole attention of Ministers, dairying, wheat-growing, fruit production and other • activities i immediately concerning the men on the land certainly having nothing to com- , plain of on this score. All of them, j indeed, in the opinion of the people ! who do not profit by the Government's j solicitude for the farmer, are being more I pr less pampered at the expense of the J consumers. The wheat duties, subsidies, j controls, embargoes and the rest are counted as positive scandals by these j critics, and the nursing of dairying and I fruit production is regarded with no I more favour. As an example of what is going on, the critics compare what they call the scurvy treatment meted out to the sawmilling industry with the favours showered upon the farmers and the orchardists. The sawmillerg are as- j sisted through the Customs tariff by a j paltry duty of some 2 per cent upon imported timber, while the fanners and orchardists, if they are not made secure by an absolute embargo against importations, are equally secure behind an import duty of 25 per cent or more. This is a particularly flagrant case of per- j verted discrimination which is being i brought under the notice of the Govern- i ment. ! A Pound of Butter. J "Mr Herman Seifert's spirited indict- ; ment of the Dairy Control Board, which J appears to have been widely distributed, is the subject of a good deal of com- ! ment in the city. The point attracting most attention is Mr. Seifert's suggestion that the board should take steps to remove the suspicion prevailing at Home that the New Zealand producer is out to unfairly exploit the English consumer. Mr. Seifert implies that this charge could be easily refuted by showing the cost of producing a pound of butter in this country, but he provides no data upon -which the necessary calculation should be based. The only precise information available on this subject is contained in the report which Mr.' W. H. Singleton, the Director of the Dairy Division of the Department of Agriculture, submitted to a Parliamentary Committee some three or four years ago. This report showed that the keep of a cow for a year on the average ran into £12 7/2— Mr. Singleton alwaVß is precise—and that if ft herd averaged 1601b of butterfat the cost of this return was 15.5 pence per pound. If the average was ISOlb, the cost was 16.5 d per pound; if 2001b, 14.8 d per lb, and if 2201b, 13.5 d per pound. | With these figures to proceed upon the . cost of producing a lb of butter, at the ! particular period to which they refer, will not be difficult to ascertain. Menace of the Pool. The "Post," taking as its text the impending conference of representatives of co-operative wheat pools in Canada, United States and Australia, voices a , thought that has been in the minds of many observant people lately. '"It is very difficult," it says, after reviewing the position, "to see the difference between some of these co-operative con- j trol schemes, notwithstanding their legal status, and commercial trusts, pools and combines. All have the same objective. But what does section 5 of our own Commercial Trusts Act, 1910, clearly state ? To monopolise wholly or partially the supply or demand of any part thereof of any goods, or to control wholly or partially their demand or supply or price is an offence. Rightly so. Where, then, is the difference between groups of co-operative farmer-producers pooling and controlling any one of the prime necessaries of life, and groups of manufacturers or merchants doing the like with, possibly, something far less important than foodstuffs? The day is nearer than some British Dominion Governments appear to be aware when they will have to control the co-operative producer—con- ' trollers of the necessaries of life. All | this is very suggestive. People are | asking how the "Wheat Contol Board and the Butter Control Board stand in ( regard to the existing law. No one appears to be ready with an immediate answer. Wheat and Flour. The Minister of Agriculture made another announcement yesterday in regard to the importation of wheat and ; flour in the immediate future, which is a little more cryptic than its numerous predecessors. "Notwithstanding the re-cently-gazetted prohibition of importation," the first paragraph of the announcement runs, "general permission is granted for the importation of flour, wheat-meal and ground wheat, if imported on or after January 18." Then there are conditions. It must be shown to the satisfaction of the Collector of Customs that the imports had been ordered from abroad not later than January 17, and that they w-ere imported into New Zealand not later than January 31, 1926.' Further, they must pay the ordinary duties and they must comply with the regulations under the Sale of Food and Drugs Act. Apparently the announcement is meant to meet the case of importers who have been unable to secure shipping space for their earlier purchase in Australia, but it. also seems to open the way to further purchases being made, provided the importer takes the risk of his goods reaching the Dominion before the end of the current month. What will happen if a cargo crosses the three-mile limit line ! ten minutes behind the days of grace is I not indicated, but probably some allow- j ance would be made. The whole business of Government control appears to be a vacillating measure of compromise.