THE FLAX INDUSTRY

Dominion, Volume 16, Issue 170, 6 April 1923, Page 8

THE FLAX INDUSTRY

Sir —Re my articles on the above which appeared in your issues of March 6,7, and 8, I am frequently asked: “If the past.lias been so profitable and the future is so splendid, why do 'you want tho Government to assist vour flax research?’ A brief explanation of tins was given in the second article. But an endeavour will here be made to fuUy explain how we. arrive at the con elusion that it is the . duty of the Government to assist this very necessary research. „ . Whetlier flaxmilling profits averaged five or fifty-five per cent, has no bearing upon the matter, except that it would be useless to assist an industry that had never been a profitable one, unless for very special In deliberating whether or not tho Government should share in the cost of ill© research, three, conditions are to be considered. Failure to satisfy any one would be sufficient grounds for refusal. Should all be satisfied, then settle on the amount and the details as to instalments, etc. there 'are no further grounds for argument. The conditions and the flax tries fulfilment of same are hereby

® l i el ls the work necessary?—When an industry’s production drops by 55 per cent, (in tons) througli the effects of a disease in the crop, no other answer is necessary. 2 Is the industry of national importance ?—During this century it has averaged an annual production of three-quarter million pounds from 50.000" acres', employing 2000 men. 3 Is it the policy of the New Zealand Government to assist, when necessary important industries?—None could denv that it is the policy of our Government to so do. As it. is the policy of every Government in .toe civilised world. Protective tariffs, ■fostered industries,^ output, subsidies, and the maintaining of many State Departments not truly concerned, with Government as laid down by Adam Smith; all are forms of such assistance. And all aro in operation within our borders. The flaxmillers, as everyone else, pav taxes to maintain the aforementioned Departments, and pay the subsidies, and bear their share of the protective tariff. The finances of th® country are organised on .that basis. Either the Government must assist all who satisfy the conditions previously referred to, or else scrap their whole policy of State grants and reduce taxation so that business could be entirely self-supporting. That would necessitate abolishing the Department of Agriculture. For the Government to refuse to assist the flax research on grounds of economy, whilst continuing, to maintain the Agricultural and similar Departments, would be tantamount, to. a prosperous father, who found his income slighljy lessened, deciding to economise by letting one of his children starve, yet allowing the otljers the same living as previously.—l am, etC ’’ HERBERT A. SEIFERT. Shannon, April 3, 1923.