WHEAT-GROWING.

Press, Volume LXIII, Issue 18942, 5 March 1927, Page 14

WHEAT-GROWING.

—+ — AUSTRALIAN FLOUR IMPORTATIONS.

THE GOVERNMENT'S ATTITUDE. « Writing in regard to the wheat question to the South Canterbury Chamber of Commerce, tho Hon. Mr Holloston, M.l'., for Timnni. states:— ••In further reference 10 your letter of February "JUli, and the resolution of your Chamber in regard to the nheat question, I have now read the report ol the discussion on this matter at the gtnicral mooting held iast week, The Chamber has uciineU its policy under tour headings, us., 0) the encouragement of wheat-growing as an industry ; V-,i Freedom oi all control in relation to tho price for marketing; $> duty equivalent to that which the farmer has to pay on implements, goods, etc.; and (4) A higher late of duty on imported Hour. "I propose to -leal with tlioo matters in the same order. (1) The Government has given substantial evidence of its desire to encourage wheat-growing in New Zealand by raising the tariff rule on wheat from !'d to '2s per cental, and on flour from £1 to £3 per ton. (2) There is now complete freedom of ail official control so far as price for marketing is concerned. (3) The duties on wheat and Hour are higher than the average duties on goods coming to New Zealand (nearly 50 per cent, of the total imports come in free except for 1 per cent, primage duty). As to agricultural implements, comparatively few of these are dutiable. (4) The question of increasing the rate of duly on imported flour is one that can be dealt with only by Parliament, and tho matter will, no doubt, bo fully discussed in connexion with the revision of the tariff next session. "Tho Government has already taken steps to check unfair importation of flour by tho imposition of dumping duty. This will undoubtedly have the effect of preventing Australian flour being landed in New Zealand at less than a reasonable price, compared with Australian domestic quotations. Your resolution suggests that further steps should be taken to prevent the importation of flour. It has already been pointed out that in view of our treaty with Australia, as to giving stx months' notice before increasing duties, m: immediate increase of the tariff rate cannot be legally imposed, and an embargo on tho importation of flour would hare the same effect as a prohibitive dtil.v. Moreover, an embargo would neoesfianT.' involve taxation of wiees, which would bo contrary to the Government's nolicy. as well as to the declared policy of vour Chimber. Short of .-mi embargo on flour and price JWation, there i* no apparent m°rns if increasing the local nricc of wheat."