Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

LAND SUBSIDIES.

"FOR COUNTRY'S GOOD" REPLY TO MANUFACTURERS. STATEMENT BY TJNION. In refutation of the statement made by the New Zealand Manufacturers' Association that the farming community is being subsidised to the tune of £12,000,000 by the general public, the Xew Zealand Farmers' Union, in a statement eays:—"lt is quite apparent that the Manufacturers' Association in its desire to have a good 'whang at the farmer, has raised its sights far too high, with the consequence that it has considerably overshot the target. Moreover, as the whole of the expenditure quoted in the statement has been ratified by Parliament—the representatives ot the public—there should be no criticism coming from a section of that general public. ■ "The statement issued by the .New Zealand Manufacturers' Association that £12,000,000 of the public's money is spent annually in pampering the farming community is both erroneous and fallacious, as no allowances have been made for the valties of benefits received from subsidies allowed. Modern business is conducted on the principle that it is sound to spend £100 to get in £100, and that principle permeates the granting of all subsidies to the farming community. 96 Per cent of Exports. "The following self-evident truths should be noted: — (a) "Out of a total export value of £34,319.000 in 1931, the produce from our farms was worth £33,023,000, or 9(i.2 per cent of the total; extinction of the fanning industry would mean national bankruptcy. (b) "The farming industry is in dan.gvr of extinction if present prices for primary produce and costs of production continue much longer. (c) "The New Zealand fanner is compelled to sell on a world price level, but his costs are assessed on the high New Zealand price level. The index of ex-

port values of farm produce Is 776, whereas that of farm expenditure is 1250. In other words it costs about £101 to grow £100 worth of produce. , On the other hand, the New Zealand Manufacturers' Association sells its output on the local market based on the New Zealand price level. (d) "Any concessions made to the farming community to help to keep the industry going are economically sound from a national point of view, while concessions made to some of our struggling secondary industries in the form of protective tariffs are economically unsound." "A Wild Guess." The union comments on the various items submitted by the Manufacturers' Association. The largest item was "Exchange benefits, £8,000,000." The union says that "such a wild, extravagant guess, -unsupported by any form j of proof, warrants little comment. The imposition of a high exchange acts as an extra protective tariff on locally-1 made goods, so that members of the New Zealand Manufacturers' Association should participate in the resulting i benefits." I Commenting on another item, "Tariff protection in England on butter and cheese," the union says: "This is one of the humorous items in the statement issued by the' New Zealand Manufacturers' Association, which, living in a alass house of protection, should not throw stones. During 1932, the sum of £303,709 was paid as duty on imported j ready-made clothing, £111,575 on im- ! ported hosiery, £91,572 on imported boots and shoes, and £90,804 on imported woollen piece goods. The purchasers of these four classes of goods therefore I had to pay nearly £000,000 extra ! through tariff duties for these goods #n order°to help to 'bolster up' these industries in New Zealand. In addition, the value of these articles manufactured in New Zealand in 1931 was £5,017,000. As local prices are assessed on landed Prices of imported goods pins' tariff duties (omitting exchange), i>l has been calculated that" a further £800.000 is added on through existing Customs tariffs. This means that the pub>of New Zealand are paying about £1,400,000 more for these four classes of jioods than if no tariffs existed." The union says it is agreeable to the withdrawal of the protection on wheat provided the duties on other commodities 1 are removed also.

Permanent link to this item

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/AS19330324.2.41

Bibliographic details

Auckland Star, Volume LXIV, Issue 70, 24 March 1933, Page 5

Word Count
658

LAND SUBSIDIES. Auckland Star, Volume LXIV, Issue 70, 24 March 1933, Page 5

LAND SUBSIDIES. Auckland Star, Volume LXIV, Issue 70, 24 March 1933, Page 5

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert