LOSS IN WHEAT

Evening Post, Volume C, Issue 23, 27 July 1920, Page 7

LOSS IN WHEAT

HOW MISTAKES WERE MADE

SIR JAMES WILSON'S CONCLUSIONS.

No complete study of the financial situation was possible, said Sir James Wilson, in his Presidential address to the Farmers' Union Conference to-day, for every day brought a. change. The exchange rate, prices of produce, the savings of the people, and the price of land were all in a jumble. Everyone looked at the matter in the light of personal experience.

One aspect of the effect of the decreased value of the sovereign, was stressed. The public demanded that the farmer should grow wheat at a fixed price, but no account was taken of the decreased purchasing power of the sovereign, When the farmers were appealed to- by the Premier to grow more wheat, from patriotic purposes, and an increased area of 100,000 acres was put "in, it ended disastrously to the growers, for the season waa a bad one and the yield fell to 214 bushels per acre—the lowest on record. The price they got had to be discounted by about one-fifth, because the sovereign had fallen to 16s Id, and labour had risen. The following year, after the losses the farmer had sustained, the area fell to 217,743 acres, and the yield was only a little better, viz., 23.19 bushels, and resulted in our having to purchase wheat outside the Dominion. Again there was a loss on the growth of this cereal. On a further appeal to put more wheat in, and the promise of better price, the area -rose" the following year to 280,076; but still the yield was only a shade better, viz., 24j- bushels. Even then the price paid was really no more than in pre-war times, for the purchasing power of the sovereign had fallen another Is 3d. During these three years the farmer who grew wheat must have lost very heavily, so much so that, when the Government haggled over the price and it came to be fixed, farmers again reduced the area., and only 208,030 acres were put in in 191&-19; but for the first time the yield was satisfactory, and rose to 31j bushels. But again the sovereign had fallen to 13s 6d, so that the price the farmers received was only equal to 4s at pre-war rates. Last season the price was a little better, but in March of this year the purchasing power of the sovereign had still further fallen. If, therefore, the Statistician made the comparison of the price of wheat during these various years, it would bs found that the farmer was getting no more for his wheat than in pre-war times, and during much of the time the prices paid had returned him less than before the war. The Minister had at last realised the position, and instead of fixing prices had guaranteed a ■ minimum. This should have been don© at the first, and there would have been much more wheat grown.