The Dominion MONDAY, SEPTEMBER, 10, 1917. COST OP LIVING AND THE PRIMARY PRODUCER

Dominion, Volume 10, Issue 3186, 10 September 1917, Page 4

The Dominion MONDAY, SEPTEMBER, 10, 1917. COST OP LIVING AND THE PRIMARY PRODUCER

J 7Oll wh&t has been said recently, in Parliament and elsewhere, about tho ' cost of living serves only to emphasise tho fact that it is easier to talk about this perennial problem than to propound a hopeful solution. Tho memorandum oil "profiteering" reoently presented to the Government by tho Board of Trade is in a different category. It is truo that this document does not pretend to offer a solution of the cost of living problem, but it has valuo and importance as.an impartial statement of facts which are very commonly ignored, though they will havo to bo taken fully into account beforo any really practical attempt can bo mado to lower the price of staple commodities. By reason of its detailed and systematic inquiries into the effect of the war on prices in this country, and particularly upon prices o f primary produce, tho Board of Trade is in a position to speak with authority. It is on this account all tho moro important that its memorandum on "profiteering" is, to anyone who reads it with an unbiased mind, a definite vindica.tion of tho primary producers of the Dominion from looso charges with which it has become-tho fashion to assail thom on account of the profits they are making or are supposed to be making as a- result of war conditions. Vote-hunting politicians and people of a similar inclination outside Parliament find an-easy road to popularity in denouncing tho farmer as a man who is making a "good thing" out of tho war, partly at the expense of hi' own fellow-countrymen. The fact that many of tho farmers of the Dominion, probably a big majority, have mado heavy profits during tho war period, and tho coincident increase in the cost of living, give surface plausibility to denunciations of this character, but an honest survey of the position makes it necessary, tha interests of justico and truth, to subject them to revision. No general denunciation of tho farmer as a winner of unjust profits will stand in face of facts whioh aro easily accessible to any inquirer and are fairly presented, in their leading aspects, in tho Board of Trade memorandum. The board shows in tho first place that "profiteering" has not been practised in this country to anything like the extent that somo utterances in and outside Parliament would lead people to suppose. But to the extent that "profiteering" has been practised; tho record of the farmer is in honourable contrast to that of some other sections of the trading community. The primary producers of the Dominion, instead of being open to a charge of war "profiteering," havo been oontent to sell their produce at prices so far below tho ruling market rates as to entail an aggregate sa-crifice, calculated by tho Board of Trado as thus far to amount to close on nine milliMs sterling. On the general question of "profiteering," tho board reports that in ordinary commercial dealing many traders have mado money by selling on a rising market goods which were purchased cheaply. It is easier to condemn this practico than to suggest a remedy. In considering a problem of this kind wo arc bound to remember that our commercial and industrial life is governed by conditions of _ rough and ready competition in which each individual, generally speaking, whether ho is selling goods or disposing of his labour, aims at getmg all ho reasonably can in return. The action of a trader who takes advantage of a rising market in war time to levy toll on the community on goods he has already in stock is manifestly open to condemnation, but the difficulty is to check such practices without singling out one. section of tho community for repressive treatment from which others, no bettor entitled to escapc, are immune. The primary produoers of the L)o----minion as a- body, in any case, in- 1 stead of being open'to attack on the , score of "profiteering," arcjsntitlcu ( to credit for the part they have , played since the outbreak of war. | Like other sections of tlie com- . munity they have suffered in having ; to pay enhanced prices for material 1 and supplies, but the figures of tho : Board of Trade show that they havo sold their produce at much lower rates than they might have obtained. The particulars given by tho Board of Trade of the amount sac- , l'ificcd in this way should bo kept in . mind as an answer to those who ac- . ouse tho farmer of taking unscrupu- , lous advantage of war conditions. ■ Approximately, the board states, the figures are:— ; J? i j)uUer HIS,OOO (Local Rales) Ctieeso 1,200,000 (Export sales) Jfeat C,000,000 (Export sales) ■\Vool 1,100,000 (Export sales) | ' These are not fancy figures based , on theoretical market values. They , represent the additional amount i Now Zealand producers would i

have obtained it they had sold_ their produco on tho British market at tho prices obtained by foreign competitors from whom Britain has purchased largely since tho Tar began; and in tho ease of local sales, tho diffcronco between the amount obtained by producers and what they would have obtained if they had sold at'ruling market rates abroad. So far as New Zealand farmers are concerned this amount of approximately nine millions sterling, which will materially increase as timo goes on, is in tho most real and definite sense a straight-out contribution to the war chest of the Empire. The memorandum under notice is chiefly of value as a fair and lucid statement_ of the facts of the existing position—a statement making for that clarity of ideas and thought which is essential to any sound departure in policy. The Board o c Trado states that it is ready, if asked by the Government to do so, to work out the details of a scheme intended to ensure that primary products shall he sold in tho Dominion at a lower price than s obtained on the British market. The manifest objection to an attempt to reach a partial solution of tho cost of living problem on these lines is that it is utterly unjust to single out one section of the community for the exceptional treatment proposed. The butter-fat levy was rightly condemned on this ground, and experience of its operation and of tho natural indignation it excited in tho farming community will hardly cncourago tho Government to embark on any similar experiment. Another possible line of action is that of State competition, as in tho case of the meat shops established and about to be established in some centrcs. To this there can bo no objection so long as the State competes on fair lines, but tho limited value_ of this particular remedy for high prices is indicated in a recent statement by tho Mayor of Wellington that he is assured by the Board _of Trado that one largo firm in this city is retailing meat at cheaper rates than are charged in tho State meat shops. Facing the facts, it must be recognised that while it is very desirable that cost of living should be reduced, it is neither just nor wise that this country should singlo out its primary producers for penal treatment intended to lead to that result. The injustice of limiting tho returns of tho primary producer whilo taking no such action in tho case of other sections of _ the trading community in itself raises an insuperable objection. _ The injustice is heightened when it is considered that tho farmer, moro than most of those engaged in commerce and industry, has to set good years and periods against others in which tho return for his labour and outlay is poor; and that if tho present period ia 0110 of high prices, it is also ono of high taxation (particularly for tho farmer, who pays both on his land and on the incomo ho earns from it), of a developing shortage of labour, and of acute shipping problems. Neither can it bo forgotten that a largo proportion of our farmers who aro now prosperous havo gained their present position at the cost of years of labour in breaking in backblocks holdings, in somo cases involving their families in long-continued hardships and privations. If objections on tho ground of injustice were over-ruled it would still havo to bo considered that wo cannot afford to arbitrarily intcrfero with and pcnaliso tho primary industries upo.n which o>tr national prosperity is, and will be for many years to come, dependent. The obvious remedy of primary producers hampered and penalised for tho sake of cheapening their produco on the local market would be to concentrate aa much as possiblo on production for export, and this would be apt in its scope to involve retrogression 'instead of tho progressive development of our vital primary industries.