WHEAT SHORTAGE.

Press, Volume LXI, Issue 18369, 30 April 1925, Page 10

WHEAT SHORTAGE.

TO THE EDITOR 07 "THE PBESS." Sir, —I do not know if you will care to publish a belated letter on the question of the wheat shortage. The present discussion has brought out the facts that the community as a whole, Tiews with considerable misgiving the decline of wheat-growing, involving as it does so many dependent industries, the threatening of our national safety should trouble arise, besides involving this year, a million pounds purchase of food'stuffs from Australia. At the same time it is acknowledged that the farmer has a right to grow what he thinks will pay best. The question therefore is why is not plenty of wheat grown at 6s per bushel, when some years ago the prospect of 3s (id would attract an exportable surplus?

I think the answer goes very deep. First it undoubtedly lies on the one side in the fact that the. world's market for wool, mutton, and lamb has advanced, and that our big dairy business has been developed; and dh the other hand that costs of production in every industry in the country employing labour have increased tremendously. Farmers depend in the main, on the world's market for the sale of their produce and the increased cost of cropping, together with a scarcity of first-class labour, has made them turn their attention to those branches of production requiring a minimum of labour. These statements will, I think, be accepted, but they lead to a further question: What is 'the cause of the big increase in the costs of production in every industry in New Zealand, including the farming industry? I think a certain part of it is due to the fact that our food products are bringing more in the world's market; and that has raised living in a manner that is legitimate and with it wages. But I think that part,_ and the main part, of the increase is due to protective legislation to foster industries of a secondary nature and to protect labour therein employed. Some ol our industries are natural to the country and need no safeguarding; some would not exist without _ protection. What effect are they having on the community as a whole? I claim that their presence, coupled with protection to their workers on the cost of living basis, has resulted iu increasing production costs throughout the country, and that it has also had a big effect in drawing population to the cities. Every industry started has entailed housing provision for its workers, and has brought with such the following of stores, land agents and so on, and this is entailing the expenditure of a vast sum of money in the cities. It may be said that this is all to the good. So far ..s industries native to the country go, I think it is, but outside of these I very much question whether we have been advancing on sound lines. I claim that if onr country farms had been filled with workers' dwellings and the cost of living not interfered with artificially, the country which comprises Chiistchurch's littcral could readily have absorbed a population equal in numbers to all dependent on the city's protected industries, and that their" efforts would have resulted in an out-turn from our main industry of greater value than from, the fostered industries, besides giving in the main better and healthier opportunities for development to the workers engaged, and providing material for further settlers. The country districts generally need more workers' homes. Many married men have been drawn to the towns for accommodation sake, and would return to the country if houses were available. But farmers as a rule, have their hand's full financing necessary improvements. Finance is more difficult to arrange for cottages in the country than in town; in fact, before building a man must be ready to find the full outlay. If some system of financing workers' cottages on farms, under some public guarantee, were arranged, it would go far to stimulate greater production ■ from the country districts, besides enabling settlement to go forward at half the cost of providing cottage j in town. Mr Otley in speaking of Hospital matters stated that the North Canterbury Hospital Board in its district, ranging from the Rakaia to the Clarence, had 158,000 people to cater for. Of these, Greater Christchurch accounts for about 100,000 and there are many country towns besides, so probably it is not beyond the mark to say that today this district contains two dwellers in the town for one in the country. This in a country relying for 98 per cent, of its exportable wealth on country production, hardly seems healthy, nor does it seem good business to view the enormous expenditure on, and rapid expansion of the towns, when such is compared with the comparatively slow ■* development of our country districts. When, further, the latent possibilities of these country districts are reviewed from Kaikoura County, with its sparse population and thousands of acres under virgin bush, through the beautiful and rich North Canterbury hiUs and valleys, to our back country with its numerous problems, and down to the rich Peninsula and plains, the impression cannot fail to be borne, home that very great expansion is possible in our greatest industry, and that such expansion can bring with it the opportunity for extensive settlement on economical lines, and under conditions for prosperity and health which the building of houses on quarter acre sections in the city will never offer. It conclusion, sir, I summarise the answer to the wheat problem as a call to man the country, marshalling financial and educational resources towards making us once more rather, a nation of country dwellers than citizens of the towns.—Yours, etc., J.T. Marlborough, April 23rd, 1925.