RETENTION OP DUTY ON WHEAT.

Press, Volume LXVI, Issue 19971, 4 July 1930, Page 13

RETENTION OP DUTY ON WHEAT.

AN AUCKLAND PROTffiT. " ■' • » . ITHE nsaa Bpeetal Strrte*] AUCKLAND, Jofr S. "This matter is too serious to let li* at present," said Mr A. G. Loan, in drawing the attention of the CbtuuriT of the Auckland Chamber of Commerce to the wide variation ill the prices of Australian and New Zealand flour, and the fact that the Govermnenfehas decided to retain the duties on wheat ' and flour for another year. Calling attention to the report o£ questions asked in Parliament on the matter, Mr Lunn said it was obvious that interests were pressing the Government to retain those duties against the opinion of a vast section of -the public. Mr W. A. Boucher contended that the lifting of these duties- would materially benefit the whole popala- = tion. Speaking as representative of the Farmers' Union, Mr A. A. Bosssaid that although farmers realised the tremendous advantage of having those duties removed, they did not see the justice of it while other industries received protection. The duty was adversely affecting the pig and poultry industries, which were capable of expansion, and farmers as a whole would be prepared to support the abolition of the duty if they had an assurance that steps would be taken to protection in all othw directions. That was practically the general opinion held oy the Farmers' Union throughout the Dominion. x Mr T. B. Clay, who said be spoke from knowledge of wheat-growing -in Australia, expressed the opinion owing to the immense advantages that Australia held in conditions utider which wheat was grown and harvested, New Zealand conl3 never hope tO: compete in price with grain grown across the, Tasntan. , The matter was referred to the Importers' Committee of the Chamber to frame a resolution of.proteofc MMMft retention el (feeilwtiea.