Untitled

Press, Volume LXIV, Issue 19199, 4 January 1928, Page 7

to tbs iDrro* or thi pbiss. Sir, —Has it occurred to you that the sliding scalo of duties on flour may eventually protect neither the millers nor £he wheatgrowersf The last report of the Australian Tariff Board made in October, states that "increased duties have failed to afford increased protection "because they directly increase the cost of living, rates of wages, and consequently the cost of production. Is not that just what will happen to the wheatgrowersP They may get 6s per bushel for wheat and then find that it costs an extra 6d per bushel to grow and market it. No mere assurance that the prices of flour and bread are not going to rise is enough to guard against economic pressure, and the operations of the Arbitration Court. The abgye report also contains the following statement: "We are convinced that it i 9 absolutely essential that the menace of the rising cost of production should be faced, otherwise we can' see nothing but disaster ahead." New Zealand appears to be very much in the same position as Australia, and if farmers could grow wheat at pre-war costs, they, would be satisfied with a reduction of 33 per cent, in whoat prices; with a corresponding reduction in the prices of flour and bread, we should be well on the way to a goneral reduction in the cost of living, and should be guarding ourselves against the menace of the rising cost of production, which is so alarming the Australian Tari'll Board. Is it not possible to havo these matters thoroughly investigated by someone, outside the Government and party politicians, who could tell us whether we are heading straight for disaster or not?—Yours,-etc., ANXIOUS FABMEB.