FREIGHT ON WOOL

Hawke's Bay Tribune, Volume XXVI, Issue 227, 8 September 1936, Page 9

FREIGHT ON WOOL

Railways Could Not Bear Lower Rate REPLY TO FARMERS By Telegraph—Press Association. WELLINGTON, Sept. 3. A request by the Dominion execu five of the New Zealand Farmers' .Union for a reduction in the railway freight for the carriage of wool has been declined by the Minister of Railway's, the Hon. D. G. Sullivan. The union contended that the rail way charge on wool was out of all proportion with the rate charged on stock.

Mr Sullivan pointed out that the Railways Department was not in a pos ition to bear the loss that would attend a general reduction in freight chargee for wool. Tho department’s scale of charges was based on a system ot classification of commodities so arranged that goods of relatively high value, such as general merchandise and manufactured products, were charged at a higher rate than lower-grade bulk goods and raw materials. It was quite tiue that wool was required to bear a higher freight rate than live stock, but that in itself could not be regarded as affording justification for adopting the lower rate as a standard for both.

it was, he thought, appropriate that mention should be made of the much greater differentiation which existed between the freight rates for wool and, say, artificial manures and agricultural lime than between wool and live stock. It could not, however, be contended with reason that because those responsible for the administration of the de partment undertook in the interests of land production to convey huge tonnages of fertilisers and lime at nominal rates they should extend the same consideration to other traffic. Obviously it could not afford to do so without seriously impairing the department’s earning capacity.