GOVERNMENT'S "CRUEL" ACTION

Evening Post, Volume 65, Issue 65, 17 March 1924, Page 5

GOVERNMENT'S "CRUEL" ACTION

"SINISTER INFLUENCE OF AUCKLAND"

DISCUSSION BY FARMERS' UNION.

The wheat controvery was continued an Friday by the Mid-Canterbury Provincial Executive of the New' Zealand Farmers' Union, reports the "Ashburtori Guardian." Mr. G. W. Leadley, •president of the executive, presided over a. fair attendance of members: ' j* j <£f£ d£ y; read a communication, dated 28th February, from Mr J. D. Hall, of the. North Canterbury'Execu-' live, in the sfollowing terms:—"l have been attacked by the people in town about the suggested return to Government control of wheat, and they want to know Low Jong the wheat-growers are to be nursed, etc. I am afraid this may create a wrong kind of atmosphere, and I think if anything can'be done to stiffen up the Minister in our favour we had better do it. I will try to get the branches in the Ellesmere electorate to write to Sir Heaton Rhodes and urge him to support the prices asked in Cabinet, and I thought that something of the same kind might be done by some of the Ashburton wheatgrowers and electors. In 1921-22 there were 204 farmers in mid-Canterbury who grew more than 50 acres, and 82 who grew more than 100 acres. Do you think it would be possible to get a substantial number of these larger growers to sign a petition to the Government or the .Minister urging an assurance of «»e 6s per bushel and undertaking to {trow an area equal to that which they grew -n the-season 1922-23? I enclose a rough draft of something of the kind, which gives such an assurance and at tile same time expresses the opinion that their member should protect their ' interests. I do not feel satisfied that we shall get what w asked for unless we do something of the kind, as I believe that something is being worked against us. I have a letter from Dr. Hilgendorf stating that wheat-growers should realise that they could; get on a, rough average an increase of four bushels per ncre if funds could be provided for research work in T.uscau; this, on a 260.000-acre crop at 5s per bushel, means £250,000 a year, and only requires a levy of - j,d per bushel. Do you think we can do anything about it?" WHEAT-GROWERS AND THE < MINISTER. The petition enclosed by" Mr.:' Hall read as follows:— ...''. "(1) We, as farmers and. wheatgrowers, are now considering what crops we shall grow next season,-and have seen the.report of the Wheatgrowers' ' Conference ' recently . held in Christchureh. (2) We have come to ihe conclusion that unless we are assured of getting at least 6s per bushel for out wheat in 1925 we had better sow sheep feed and buy ewes, which can be bought cheaply at the present time. (3) On the other hand, if the above price is assured to us we can / and will (weather permitting) put in the approximate area in wheat, which we grew in the season 1922-23. . . . IWe ask you, as our'member, and as -. the Minister of Agriculture, to take a ; firm stand in. this matter, and to insist that farmers who grow wheat; should have their interests ijrotected."' Mr. Leadley said the time was so short when negotiations were on, and the Government might have thought that the farmers were suspicious of it, that no action in the direction suggested had been taken by him. '' REDUCTION; NOT AN INCREASE. The opinion of Mr. Hall on the Government's decision was then read by Mr. Leadley, to whom he had written, as follow:—". . . With the embargo removed and with flour at present prices in Australia, it would be imported here at a price equal to wheat at 4s sJd,' and the extra 10s on flour would raise this to 4s 7|d. Instead of raising the price, as the conference asked, by 9d, the Government has reduced it by ?Jd. I do not think the Government" could have adopted a more effective or more cruel way of wiping out the wheat industry and of ruining many farmers in the pro- . cess. I propose to call the conference together again, and would be glad to hoar from you as to. what you consider wonld be a suitable date; the Christchurch Ram Fair is pn the 20th and 21st, and I.understand there is to be a meeting of the Wheat Board on the 19th, so that it would seenr as if it were better^to make the date for the conference ' about the 26th or 27th. If, however,' you would prefer to have an earlier date, would yoube so good as to wire me. The next conference should be a large and a really representative one, and it would also be desirable that it should be preceded by some local meetings in the different districts, and the opinion, if agreed to, should be expressed very clearly and distinctly, that at 4s 7Jd farmers are not going to lose money in trying to grow wheat." ACCEPTING DECISION. Mr. Fv Frampton said they, should Bccept the Government's decision, and say no more about it. This state of affairs.had had to come sooner or later. The community would now have to come to growers, whereas in the past growers had been begging of the Government for a fair price to permit them to grow. It was now for the growers to please themselves. Probably the threshing mill and general labour charges would now come down. The growers', price must come down before the cost of labour would fall. In a year or' two the community might be giad to urge the Government to give some assistance. It was perhaps just as well this thing had happened. .Mr. Frampton moved: "That this union accepts the decision of the Government." . This was seconded by Mr.-.J. Fleming Mr. H. Willis supported the motion. ■ Mr. F: Evans said he was glad to hear the changed tone of members; at Vie big meeting, he had been on his own in his views. Farmers now knew exactly where they stood, and could please-them-selves: It was quite time the wheat position got back to the balance of supply and demand. Perhaps the duty and embargo would help those who continued in the industry. In the old days wheatgrowers did not seek any protection. Messrs. Fleming and A. P. Bruce supported the motion. -- - • "AN AUCKLAND DECISION."' Mr.: Leadley said the decision appeared to him to be an Auckland decision ; one due to the sinister influence of Auck-. land men. Investigations had opened his eyes. The farmers were now shut out, once and for all (except when there was no exportable surplus in Australia) from the North Island market'for their wheat. The Auckland mills could obtain their supplies from Australia at about the same as, or even a little cheaper than, from Timaru. The facilities for hauling flour, bran, etc., in the North Island wore great both by steamer and by rail, and his conviction was that the North Island market was''handed over to Australia. The duty would giye but Ji£tle Si^_,

tection. He did not believe Parliament would agree to an increase in the duty on flour. They must remember the elements against such a rise. It would more than likely happen that it would be lowered. However, the decision of the Governmeent had cleared the air; they knew where they stood. It was a good thing it happened when it did, before the wheat was sown. He was plad the Government had come out into the open and given its opinion. All knew now what value the Government attached to the industry. ■ Regarding the principle of fixing prices, Mr. Leadley said everybody else had their- wages fixed except the farmer, who worked purely 1% chance. This much was a fact, however, that during the last two years the Wheat Board had succeeded in putting into the pockets, of the growers £500,000 that they would not otherwise have received. He was quite in accord with the motion ; growers could now do what they liked, knowing definitely where they stood. ~ The motion was then carried. On the motion of Mr. A. Moore, the union thanked' Mr. Leadley for what he had done in bringing the wheile subject to a head.