Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

BRITAIN’S BOUNTY

WHO GETS THE EXTRA £3,500,000?

THE PRODUCERS OR STABILISATION ACCOUNTS?

(Special.) WELLINGTON, Aug, 28. Stating that reliable information showed that the recent price increases given by Britain under contract for New Zealand exported produce would amount to £5,500,000 a year, Mr W, Sullivan (Nat., Bay of Plenty) asked the Government in the House last night to make an early statement as to how much of this sum was to be paid direct to the producers, If the Minister of Finance intended to pay the whole sum into the various stabilisation accounts, continued Mr Sullivan, he was going to defeat the object of Britain paying higher prices, because the purpose was to encourage still greater production of food for Britain. What the producer wanted, he suggested, was not so much increased prices as reduced costs, because he knew quite well that the time would cpme when he would have to face competitive prices from the other food-produc-ing countries which supplied Britain, and he wanted to see his costs come down so that he could meet that competition on better terms, He did not see bow the Government could ever establish a case for giving a subsidy out of the primary producers’ account, under whicn all benefited at the expense of the few. Mr Sullivan also said that the National Party bad always encouraged and supported the secondary industries, No Opposition member wanted to do any injury to the secondary industries, and desired to see the primary and secondary industries working together, The trouble to-day was that industry was pot allowed to .run freely ? and men were not given an incentive, A land development policy was needed. There were great opportunities in afforestation and also w° n d er ful opportunities of developing the tourist trade. Nothing, however, could be done along those lines unless free enterprise were allowed to move freely, and that was not possible if it was excessively taxed and unduly restricted, as it was to-day,

Permanent link to this item

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/ESD19460828.2.33

Bibliographic details

Evening Star, Issue 25882, 28 August 1946, Page 4

Word Count
329

BRITAIN’S BOUNTY Evening Star, Issue 25882, 28 August 1946, Page 4

BRITAIN’S BOUNTY Evening Star, Issue 25882, 28 August 1946, Page 4

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert