Manawatu Evening Standard. THURSDAY, NOV. 7, 1929. THE WHEAT INDUSTRY.

Manawatu Standard, Volume XLIX, Issue 291, 7 November 1929, Page 8

Manawatu Evening Standard. THURSDAY, NOV. 7, 1929. THE WHEAT INDUSTRY.

The • House of Representatives came to a wise decision in adopting the. report of the special select set up to consider the incidence of the wheat and flour duties. The wfie'at-in-dustry is certainly not the least important of the primary producing industries of this Dominion, both in respect .of the prpduct and its employing capacity, but, unlike the dairying, meat asd wool industries, it requires a certain amount of encouragement if it is to continue on, a scale ; mensurate with our- own refttiire- 1 ments in .the shape of breadstuff's. Rather unfortunately, as ‘we think, wheatgrowing is pltbost wholly confined to the South Island, where it is a.very itqportant factor in contributing "to the' wealth of the country’, But, because North Inland ‘ farmers have very largely abandoned wheat growing as part of their producing activities, there has been, and remains, a very decided division of opinion concerning the wisdom of continuing an industry which needs the protection of duties, which are said to press hardly upon the people. During the preelection campaign last year United Party candidates, in the North Island more particularly, made much out of the alleged oppressive incidence of the protection accorded by the State to wheatgrowers, urging the abolition of the duties, or, alternatively, the subsidising of the industry. In the one case the removal of the duties would have meant the practical extinction of the industry, and, in the other, it would merely have added to the burdens of the taxpayer, with no guarantee that the price of bread would have been cheapened, or that the consumer would benefit materially by the State maintaining the industry in that fashion. As a matter of fact, a comparison of bread prices in New Zealand with those of the Australian centres shows that the 21b loaf can be purchased as cheaply in most towns in this country as in the leading towns of the Commonwealth. Two years ago, when the position of the wheatgrower was carefully considered by the Government and full enquiries were made on the subject, the sliding scale of duties decided' upon and agreed to by Parliament stabilised prices and gave both the wheatgrower and the miller the needed protection against the dumping of surplus stocks of wheat and flour, that would inevitably occur when the Australian products were in excess of the Commonwealth s requirements. It has been argued in some quarters and,in his 1919 manifesto Sir Joseph Ward suggested that it would be better for the country to import Australian breadstuft's to meet our requirements, and presumably the right

hon. gentleman was prepared to let the wheatgrowing industry go by the board, and to import all the wheat and flour needed for the maintenance of our people. But, during the war years, such experience as we had in the purchase of those commodities in Australia showed that full advantage was taken of our necessities and that, when the late Hon. W. D. S. Macdonald went upon the Sydney and Melbourne markets to fill New Zealand requirements, he had to actually pay more than the local selling rates for his purchadls, and it cost the country not less than 6s 6d per bushel to land Australian wheat in New Zealand. On the present consumption of breadstuft’s in the Dominion, we should require, assuming that wheatgro,wmg here went out of existence, to send not less than £2,000,000 per annum abroad for the purchase of the breadstuffs required for the maintenance of our people. Apart from that, there would be the consequent loss of employment and a substantial reduction in the wages fund, which would detrimentally affect the workers.

A SENSIBLE DECISION.

The select committee in the course of its inquiries took evidence from farmers, millers, importers, workers, and all who cared to come forward to express their views on the subject, and it is satisfactory to note that the House adopted its views, based on its investigations, that the sliding scale of duties should be retained, and endorsed its suggestion that bran and pollard should be admitted free of duty, the latter being a concession to poultry farmers, the adoption of which should not disturb the miller’s business to any appreciable extent, although it may reduce his profits. The committee was unanimous in its expression of opinion that the Dominion should be self-supporting, so far as its wheat requirements are concerned, and that the wheatgrowers should have some sort of protection. The amendment moved by Colonel McDonald, that the report be referred back to the committee for further consideration, which would have been tantamount to its rejection, was defeated by 50 to 20. The majority included 12 Labour members, and all the South Island members with the exception of Messrs Black (Motueka) and McDougall (Central Otago) whose votes, were recorded in favour of the amendment. The minority included, in addition to those gentlemen, six other representatives of rural constituencies— Messrs Broadfoot (Waitomo), Hogan (Rangifikei)j Langstone (Wairaarino), Lye (Waikato), Lee Martin (Raglan) and Rushworth (Bay of Islands), the two last-named being the only farmer members voting for it. Of the remaining 12, seven were Labour members and the other five were representatives of urban constituencies. Nationalisation of the ■flour milling industry, which features as a cardinal point in the Labour Party's programme, found a lone supporter in the member for Lyttelton, who, with an evident eye upon that objective, suggested that “the only satisfactory way of ensuring that the farmer received a payable price was for the State to acquire a sufficient number of mills to meet the Dominion’s requirements.” The House failed to rise to the suggestion, for the simple reason that the Labour Party is keeping such matters discreetly in the background for the time being, and none of its members chose to follow up Mr McCombs’s suggestion.