PRICE OF FLOUR.

Hokitika Guardian, 10 April 1923, Page 3

PRICE OF FLOUR.

fnV TELKO RAIMI

-PER TRESS ASSOCIATION.]

curistci inu n. April 9

Messrs Sullivan. Howard. Armstrong and McCombs, .M's.l’. Imve received tbe following wire from ibe Prime .Minister:—‘‘l handed your telegram regarding the embargo on wheat: and Hour tu Mr Xosuorthy, who has prepared a reply which is published to-

'i lie Labour Members have replied as follows:—‘-Mr Nnsworlliy'.s latest defence of the Hour embargo, to which you have referred ih. is less convincing than Ins former efforts. Mr \ustvorthy knows that there is nil efficient anli-dumping law on our .statute book, which empowers the Customs authorities to charge the importer with the difference between ibe export or dumping price, and the fair market price in the country of origin, and on top of that, there is a duly of £■> Ids par ton on Hour, bran and pollard, besides nri- . inage duty. 'lbe millers askeo tints lb proleetioii should be fixed by statute, : ami I’arliament gave tliis industry Ml the protection asked lor. 1 nder tne eirenmstanees. the (bivernmeiit is no more .justified in prohibiting the importation of boots. Mr Xosworthy knows quite -II that tbe market quotation j lor wheat in Australia, when the im!icrs bad to buy their supplies, was _ os ffii to ."is oil liar bushel. Mr Nosworthy !ki.s not satisinrtorily cxiibiiiu'd , the reason v.kv New Zealand milleis should charge tlo Ids less live per rent, discount, for Hour manufactured from Xew Xenia ml wheat which costs the same as ill Australia. If. as lie says the Australian millers are selling Hour n c uq |is< net 1 .0.h.. why is it ncccasan“' for the New Zealand millers to charge £1 1 1I- '>! I- The extra cos. o| sacks. Its. will not aeioiint lor tlie difference. became that still knives LUs fid extra profit lor the New /.calami millers. Tbe extra price which me Australian millers receive lur their bran amt pollard. 30s. is no excuse wlmtau. ■ because why should the New Zv.imn bread consumer have to pa., *- i ‘ price for bis bread in order that pigs liiav have cheap food: V e "ave aI,lone contended that the New /calami farmer should be paid •>• •" On 1 wheat, embargo or no embargo. because the millers are more than amply protected hy the £2 DC duty. P primage, ami plus the ant.-dnmp> g lav,-. The farmers gam nothing Bom the embargo. Under cover of tm "u bn ret*. die millers . nloit the tanners, because the profits which the millers are enabled sr„.i wheat could not be maonol umhT - a bushel, duty paid. Ihe £2 ' on Hour is equivalent to pvutse«on. and if the New Zealand millets « k content with a reasonable P'oht. - - tralian (lour could no more eompste successfully with New Zealand float than can Australian wheat, lie. l clttoers of butter and cheese and .man and wool have to be content with the export parity for their pioducv. . it is unfair that they should bo cMei upon to pay a price for their bread considerably in excess of its fair market value. The- public servants and