THE SUGAR INDUSTRY.

Evening Post, Volume LXXXIII, Issue 105, 3 May 1912, Page 4

THE SUGAR INDUSTRY.

COLONIAL REFINING COMPANY'S POSITION. The statement tendered by the generaJ manager of the Colonial Sugar Refining Company (Mr. Knox) to the Royal Commission on the sugar industry of Aus- ' tralia (appearing in full on page 10 of' this issue) shows that, the direct protec tion afforded the industry is £2 per ton ■ for raw sugar, being the difference betweeii the import duty on foreign sugar of £6 per ton,' and the exoise duty on Australian sugar of £4 per ton. From 1 the excise duty the Federal Government 1 pays 'to growers a bounty of 6s 'a ton on cane grown in New South Wales, and7s per ton on cane grown in Queensland (the latter cane being of greater sweet- 1 ness). This is equivalent to about £3 per ton of raw sugar. The tariff increases the price of sugar in Australia by £6 per ton, of which the cane' grower "etc £3, the raw sugar manufacturer £2, and the reveniw-fil. The re-, liner receives no protection whatever, according to Mr. Knox. The Colonial Sugar Refining Company," which" has- forty, years' experience in working sugar mills, finds that after allowing for depreciation' of machinery, that the return over the [iast five years has been only about- 7 per cent, on capital invested in sugar mills' in Australia. The company's average' price to growers for the past ten years 1 is 15s 4^d per lon, while the Queensland Government's central mills average is 14s llfd per ton. The company mills and refines sugar in Australia, and does > not grow cane there. * As refiners the Colonial Sugar, ;lse"finjn J g , Company seeks 10 per cent.. gro66 profit on its investments, or 1 abput v £l per toil on the capital invested, ,ov 5 per cent.' on the selling pi-ice* »v Australia j but the actual experience ;s that only. 16s, "per ton,' or ' 4 per-.cjent., on- the selling i prices, has been obtained during recent years from sugar- purchased in Australia. Except for the .difference in duty, "sugar' costs less in Sydney thah m London^ Sugar being duty free in'- New Zealand costs lees than in Australia, practically to tho extent of the duty paid there. The company's- "secret of success" is divulged by Mq. Ktiox. It •ie due to the chemical control of ■ the manufacturing processes and the payment of outside liabilities with funds provided by the shareholders. The savings of sugai by the chemical processes adopted have been very great. With regard to the company as an employer,. Mr. Knox explains that the Employees' Provident Fund was in- ! augurated twenty-two years ago, that' there 16 equal participation in' its benefits open to- all permanent employees, staff, or wage-earners, and it is administered by a board of five trustees, two of whom are elected by the staff, two by the wage- [ earners, and the general manager of the i I company represents the subsidy of over [ £70UO per annum as a direct subsidy, and nearly £3000 per annum on ad^ ditional pensions.