The Wheat Problem.

Press, Volume LXII, Issue 18672, 22 April 1926, Page 8

The Wheat Problem.

A conference between representatives of the A. and P. Association and the Chamber of Commerce discussed the wheat problem in private yesterday, and decided to send a deputation to Wellington to ask the Government to give effect to the suggestion that the duty on flour should be increased and that the damping of foreign (i.e. Australian) flour should be met, "now " and at all future times," by the imposition of dumping duties. The ground upon which this suggestion is based is that the duty on a manufactured article should be greater than the | duty on the equivalent raw material; and as a general principle this may be allowed. It is possible that it may without impropriety be allowed i- the present case, but the millers have not removed the impression that they ought to be able to undersell Australian flour with 7s wheat, and (lo as well as the only milling company whose balancesheet is public property—the Atlas Milling Co., which paid 15 per cent, last year, with flour at £lB, after paying more than 7s for its wheat. Throughout the controversy on the wheat question, our chief concern has been the interests of the wheat-growers, who have had no organisation and have for years been the victims of poor and unrepresentative leadership. For years they have been exploited by the millers iind have not had sympathy or fair play from the public, and it is our purpose to do what we can to end that. If a policy which will help the growers will also help the millers, directly or indirectly, we should not grudge the millers any of their advantages, but the growers' interests pust come first. The conference which was held yesterday did not admit the newspapers to its discussion, but we may assume that it believed, in framing the resolution to be put before the Government, that the aid given to the millers will benefit the growers. Now there is only ono way in which the growers can be benefited: they must receive more for their wheat than the .millers like to give them. Are we to assume that if they receive greater protection against Australian flour the millers will pay the farmers more for their grain? This is a question whick only the millers can answer, and it ia

a question which the growers will expect to be answered and answered promptly. The milling interests have shown so little regard for the growerhave, indeed, addressed themselves so vigorously to the business of hitting the grower—that he may reasonably demand some assurance of a change of heart before he will co-operate with the millers. For he is not now so helpless as he used to be in the past. He has had his case recognised by the public and the Government, he is ready for organisation on effective lines, and in the last resort he can achieve independence of milling hostility. It is the millers' own fault, of course, that there has occurred this sharp conflict of interests, as they doubtless have realised, for they threw away in December last an opportunity to win the growers to their side. They are now given another chance.