Evening Post. WEDNESDAY, MAY 26, 1920. CIRCUMSTANCES ALTER CASES

Evening Post, Volume XCIX, Issue 124, 26 May 1920, Page 6

Evening Post. WEDNESDAY, MAY 26, 1920. CIRCUMSTANCES ALTER CASES

To an unbiased observer, the current argument between price-regulation and open.competition would be amusing if it was not sevipus. Theoretically, the case For the free market, and against Government control, can be made out in a very telling manner; but, like similar cases, it strikes trouble through the frequency and magnitude of its exceptions. Consider, for instance; the consistency of the farmers in the matter of free trade, freedom of trading, and, hi particular, the meat commandeer. As a statement of doctrine, if it could ignore the circumstances that alter cases, Mr. G. L. Marshall's address as President of • the Wellington Farmers' Union, delivered at the Union's Provincial Conference at Feilding, is an.imposing affair. Mr. Marshall told the farmei .delegates that "the practice of controlling prices seems to be ineffective in protecting the consumer, while discouraging the producer." And he also said : <

Controlled prices mean doing away with competition, which is the "soul of trade." Unless there is unrestricted trade tho tendency is to increase the margin between what the producer receives and what the consumer pays for tho finished article, because it is impossible to fix a fair margin of profit for every process which tho produce goes through ufter it leaves the farm. . . . Interfering with natural tradf conditions tends to curtail production, and ultimately'the public has to "foot the lull." '

Now, whether this is right or wrong, it is logical and consistent. It is . a policy. ■ But how did the Wellington 'Provincial Conference of the Farmers' Unions proceed to apply it?

The discussion, it is reported, opened out consistently enough with an allegation that " farmers generally did not want prices fixed at all; what they asked for was ,a free market." But, on top of this, an amendment was carried asking tho Government to fix a price for wheat. Of courss, it may be contended that this desire of the farmers for a fixed wheat price is entirely unselfish; that they are thinking not of themselves, but of the unfortunate.consumer of the staff of life, A little further investigation of the amendment, however, shows that it aims not at a maximum price for the wheatgrower but at a minimum price; which means that the farmer is protected against a low market, and is given freedom of action in a high market, while the consumer is to be permitted the assistance of the "soul of trade" only when the market is high. To this, no doubt, the reply is possible—though by no means conclusive—-that without soma sort of Government subsidy to the New Zealand wheat-grower the bread-eater will go hungry. But who is it that secures first cut in the subsidy, and where is the farmers' consistency? Again, there is the question of ending or re : r;ewing the Governmental, meat commandeer. A few weeks ago' many farmers were clamouring for the termination of the commandeer; for abolition of Government interference: for private enterprise against State control; for renewal of free trading in a free, market; for reinstatement of " the soul of trade." But since then prices have moved down a little and have caused a flutter; the congestion remains serious; and yesterday the Conference voted for continuance of the Imperial Government's commandeer. Here again is an instance of how circumstances alter cases. Of course, the farmers do not possess a monopoly of inconsistency, and they uppeail to be entitled to an explanation by the British Food Controller, Mr. M'Cuitly, of his apparent lack of con-' sis-tency. over the price of imported mutton. A long time ago New Zealand producing interests asked the British Government to remove the congestion in British p frozen mutton stores (with its consequential congestion, time-losses, and money losses in shipping, in Australasian cold stores, and on Australasian farms), and suggested that the remedy was the stimulation of British consumption by lowering the price of mutton. ' We have already shown (in these columns on 17th May) that the British Food Controller in May made the price-reduction which ho had previously refused, and which in February last he deprecated on the ground that, owing to impending mcatshoitage. ihe British people, could not safely be encouraged to cat more meat. Now. in the intervening period the facts of the. situation, from the impending famine' standpoint, could hardly have altered so much as to justify in May what was not justified a few months before ; and the suspicion forces itself that the alteration is not, in the facts but in thfi Food Controller's calculations/ How serious the matter is for New Zealand is shown by Mr. Marshall's statement that had the price been lowered " six months ago, when we nslced for it, the present difficult position [stores congested and fats held up] would not have arisen." To this extent the farmers may attribute their own inconsistency to the British Food Controller's inconsistency, but the fact remains that State control is a favourite haven for anyone to refuge in in time of stress, be he free trader or Socialist.

Now that the current of farmer opinion has set in so strongly in favour of renewal of the .commandeer or requisition, tho question' of price' and terms becomes exceedingly important to the country's prosperity. One delegate to the Conference, Mr. Balsillie, stated that " the Imperial authorities could not possibly continue to pay tlin prices now ruling." Another, Mr. Matheson, was willing to

sl'll the new meat to the Imperial authorities at 10 per cent, below the present contract price provided that the stores arc cleared "20 per cent, more'quickly than meat goes into them." Mr. R. Darby pointed out that the removal of the New Zealand glut was dependent on removing the glut "at the other end ''; and other information given- as to deterioration of the long-stored meat suggests that the removal of the congestion in Britain may not be so easy as it looks, even at reduced prices. On the whole, tho meat outlook is not good, especially when considered in connection with the prices of land. It is time that the Board of Agriculture, or somebody, discovered a. policy.