THE Hauraki Plains Gazette. With which is Incorporated THE OHINEMURI GAZETTE. MONDAY, WEDNESDAY, FRIDAY. “Public Service.” MONDAY, APRIL 5, 1943 INCOME & STABILISATION

Hauraki Plains Gazette, Volume 52, Issue 3248, 5 April 1943, Page 4

THE Hauraki Plains Gazette. With which is Incorporated THE OHINEMURI GAZETTE. MONDAY, WEDNESDAY, FRIDAY. “Public Service.” MONDAY, APRIL 5, 1943 INCOME & STABILISATION

When the Government decided to-deprive sheep-farmers of some of the increased price—offered by the British Government for the current season’s wool clip—by compelling them to stand the

cost of stabilising the cost of wool used internally and by diverting some of the extra money into the public account, - giving the . growers ' non-transferable

stock, one reason advanced was that payment of the full amount.

viiau p<*,y iiiciib ujl Liic mu aiiiuuiiu, about £2,250,000, would tend to create inflation. There was never any justification for taking one item of income and making it the basis for such a charge. Fluctuations in other items might have the effect of seriously reducing, if not of wiping but, any increase due to higher prices for wool. And the latest issue of the Abstract of Statistics shows that gross farming income generally declined in the production year, 1941-42. The v estimated gross income for all farm produce was down by £1,800,000 as compared with the previous year. The only sec-

tion to show an advance was that of agricultural produce, due to new record levels for both value and volume of production, and the gross increase was put down at £1,000,000 when compared with that of the preceding year. Wool, of course, comes under the heading “pastoral” and the gross income showed a decline of £1,200,000 and the dairy-farm-ing total was down by £1,600,000. These serious. downward fluctuations affect the position immediately, and would fee most effective in removing any ■ risk of inflation due to primary proz~4 11 nrx i-ii /-»/*• r T* U zi-rT »mci I n"tr

i VLVIV*-/ JkJXXWOe JL XXV/ VXllt/lUi V/ZV I planation of last year’s farming : income decline is interesting: “Notwithstanding an increase in wool production in 1941-42, decreased slaughterings and slightly lower unit values for I most classes of livestock were j responsible for the decrease in ; both value and volume of pas,l toral production.” ;. The ■ Government, when it j made its decision with regard to I wool, could have had no assurj ajice that this downward movement in gross farming income would not continue during the r.nrrent nroduction vear. So

much depends upon, climatic conditions, and unfortunately they have not been as favourable as could be wished in many important districts. Production probably will be down. If both volume and value of exports were fairly steady then the full increase in wool prices this season would make the gross farming income very little above that recorded in 1940-41, and the various members of the Ministry were not unduly concerned about inflation in those days. It is well to remember also that though gross farming income was down ■it nnrtnin tTiaf. 'nrndnrtinn. costs

showed a substantial rise, so that the net position of primary producers can have been less likely than ever to create a threat of inflation. When the Governrrtent made its decision against the wool-growers, did it give a moment’s thought to the fact that gross farming income had fallen substantially in the previous year? If not, then it overlooked the fact that that decline offset materially any benefit to be derived from an increase in prices for wool for a season.