SYDNEY LETTER.

Lyttelton Times, Volume CXVII, Issue 17701, 30 January 1918, Page 6

SYDNEY LETTER.

WHEAT OR MEAT.

Australian farmers face

PROBLEM. '

jjSj [From Our Correspondent.]

January 24

;The position relating to wheat cultivation in Australia. has been discussed by a. conference of farmers in Sydney this week, and the net result of it all so','far is that they remain very much ir£ the condition of uncertainty they were in before. The problems are (1) whether wheat growing shall be restricted, and if so to what extent, and (2) whether any scheme can be devised for assisting settlers to make the change from agricultural to pastoral pursuits. The view taken by the New fcJbuth Wales Minister for Agriculture isjthat wheat growing should be limited to* an- acreage sufficient to meet local requirements. Among farmers themselves there is a naturally keen desire to, know all the facts in relation to the shipping and finance at the disposal of the Commonwealth and a belief tnat the Government should provide a guarantee for next year's crop. '.A new" feature has been introduced ilito the general problem. This is the statement made by Professor MaxwellDefroy that under no circumstances should Australia relax in the production of wheat. Professor Lefroy is a distinguished entomologist, who, having cp'ine to Australia on behalf of the British Government for the purpose of investigating the weevil, discovered that the pest can be kept under control by devices that are exceedingly simple. Professor Lefroy states that if the wheat is stacked on properly ventilated bases and guarded against rain the loss through the weevil will be negligible. No one would question his opinion on this subject, but when the professor exhorts us to continue growiing grain it is to be feai*ed he hardly grasps what is before us an this matter. , , The simple question on which everything turns is this: Would a full crop of Australian wheat be a marketable commodity live years hence? There is room for difference of opinion on this subject, but there really seems _no reason why—if there is no certainty about transporting wheat to market — Australian farmers should give preference to wheat over meat. To go on as we have been going would be madness unless a guarantee is offered that the farmers' product will pass into consumption instead of remaining on hand, a drug on the market, so to speak.

FIVE YEARS' SUPPLY OF WHEAT. Tho Minister of Lands confesses himself to be almost appalled by the difficulties, and unlike Professor Maxwell Lefrcy, is exhorting farmers who are i able to take to stock raising to do tfo at once. The harvest now being gathered cannot under any conceivable circumstances be transported oversea until five years have passed. The surplus still on hand from previous years is enormous. Even if shipping wero back to normal it would take five years to transport the wheat now on hand, and if we proceed on the old lines we would at the end of five years have scores of millions more bushels piled up on the farms and in railway clearing depots. The farmers ask for a subsidy of 5s 6d a bushel. That would involve borrowing £67,000,000. Continue doing this for. five years and—well the nation would have £335,000,000 invested m a security which might be worth—what.'' No one can say. If the State does not 'guarantee the grower a price tor IU9 wheat how is he going to live during the five years tho depleted shipping ot the world is struggling to remove the accumulation previously on hand? No one can answer that, either? Wool can be disposed of with less tonnage than wheat. It does not deteriorate. Its value is less speculative. Meat is not so bulky as grain. There is room for millions' more sheep in AustraliaMINISTER'S ADVICE. Addressing the Fanner' Conference, Mr Ashford, Minister of Lands, said they had to consider what lines to adopt-to maintain the amount of wealth we must have here for distribution io the people throughout the Commonwealth. The only apparent solution tvas*a fairly large increase in stock production. .Any interference with the ordinary avenues of stock raising was to be deprecated. But there were conditions under which the country could •not longer tolerate tho slaughter of immature female stock. Every weeir calves, two to six weeks old, not fit tor humftn consumption, were sold in the S\dnev market. It cculd be assumed that there were 100,000 such calves • killed annually in Now South WalesThere must be some method of conserving young stock. He suggested central calf-rearing depots and the subsequent sale of the poddies. It was necessary to take 6ome action to insure the keeping of calves to an age at livhich the country would get the 'MI advantage from them as beef. It might be necessary to prevent the slaughter of female sheep and cattle Until they were a certain age for a period of two, three or four years. A Farmer: Each of the countries that passed such laws has repealed them. Mr Ashford: That does not prove it would not be to our advantage- He , went on to say the position had to be analysed from the point of view of the return in ready money to Australia in view of the shipping shortage. There was a greater amount of labour employed in wheat-growing* but a ton of wheat was only worth £lB in London to-day'; while meat wan. worth £9O, wool £l5O, butter £l5O, anw cheese about £IOO. We womld get far better - results from shipping meat and stock products. ■There would be just as great a need for meat and wool when the war finishes as for wheat. England had increased her wheat area by a million' acres, and would add another million this year. They had also to consider what could be done in America to increase production. Another Farmer: What price is America guaranteeing per bushel? Mr Ashford: We cannot get the high prices being paid in America, but if we grow wheat we must provide that the growers received a fair recompense. (Hear, hear.) It would be utter madness to develop on lines that wmild not be payable in the finish. _ • After prologned discussion the conference decided to seek further enlightenment regarding the position from the

Federal Government, to press for a guarantee of 5s 6d a bushel for three years and to urge the Government to encourage wheat production in every reasonable way. THE FEDERAL MINISTRY. The Federal Parliament hurriedly adjourned last week, and the Ministry, safe for the moment, has time to face the task of rehabilitating itself in public estimation. The position it occupies now is pathetic—the object of jibes of derision from foes and former friends alike. Its escape from direct defeat on the no-confidence motion moved by the Opposition was very narrow. An hour or so before the division it was learned by Ministers that negotiations were in progress between a section of their followers and the Labour Party to vote for an amendment declaring the expediency of forming a new National Government from elements in both parties. Ministers had an anxious period of adventure with the recalcitrants. A caucus was hurriedly called and extreme party pressure brought to bear upon the waverers. They gave way—but the Ministry was badly scared. The patching up of peace in the party ranks was, however, only adequate fvr the purposes of the hour. The cleavage in the party is almost daily widening, and Ministers will be hard pressed to hold the revolt in check.,, Badly though Mr Hughes's reputation in the country had been broken by the farce incidental to his resignation and resumption of office, it suffered still further damage .just before Parliament adjourned. In excusing his evasion of the Bendigo pledge relating to conscription, Mr Hughes, in his speech to the House of Representatives, had declared his readiness " to stand aside" if his presence prevented the Opposition and Liberals coming together and forming a National Administration. It transpired, however, that the Prime Minister in Jris "Hansard" proof a qualification to this ... "if the leader of the

Opposition will agree to a policy acceptable to the Liberal Party." This is not what Mr Hughes said. It is not what he meant the House to understand. It was an afterthought, completely altering the characer of tho offer he wanted the people to understand he had made. Exposure of tho triek mado a sensation in Parliament. Outside it seemed the most natural thing in the world to hear of.