Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

Wheatgrowing

Sir, —Your article .of August 22, though reasoned and logical, is pitched on altogether too low a key. The price of wheat has been too low. Now devaluation has made it considerably lower in real terms. With our devalued dollars, we face a great impetus in harvesting and production costs, notably machinery, diesel fuel, weedicides and pesticides, all without subsidy. You write of a better deal for the 1977 harvest. Why not 1976? The philosophy that we are cornered for this season, produces no good will, rough justice, or even fair play. Increased sowings this year were the result of “no alternatives.” Reference to the subsidy on flour was not very relevant. New Zealand consumers can pay for their daily bread, even if they receive a massive subsidy of a million dollars a week on milk! I would agree with Mr Muldoon that this “Government does not -nderstand fanning”—cer-

tainly not arable farming.— Yours, etc., OBSERVER. August 26, 1975.

This article text was automatically generated and may include errors. View the full page to see article in its original form.
Permanent link to this item

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/CHP19750828.2.99.12

Bibliographic details

Press, Volume CXV, Issue 33933, 28 August 1975, Page 12

Word Count
160

Wheatgrowing Press, Volume CXV, Issue 33933, 28 August 1975, Page 12

Wheatgrowing Press, Volume CXV, Issue 33933, 28 August 1975, Page 12