DUTIES ON WHEAT.

Manawatu Standard, Volume L, Issue 220, 13 August 1930, Page 8

DUTIES ON WHEAT.

ALTERNATIVE TO PROTECTION

(By Telegraph.—Special to Standard.) WELLINGTON, Aug. 13. An alternative to the present high protection for wheat and flour was proposed by Mr McCombs who, as an amendment to the motion for tho second rending of the Customs Amendment Bill, moved in the House of Representatives early this morning that in order to provide cheaper wheat and flour, also to assist local wheatgrowers, the Government be recommended to bring in legislation for payment of a subsidy to the wheatgrowers in lieu of the present duty. Mr McCombs explained that he was not moving the amendment officially and had no idea of defeating the Bili. It would give the House an opportunity of expressing an opinion on the lines advocated oy the Labour Party and, if carried, there would be cheaper broad and poultry feed. Tho Prime Minister, Hon. G. W. Forbes, pointed out that the wheatgrowers had sown their crop under the terms of protection and to that extent he objected to the amendment. He would like to know what would happen to his Bill if the amendment was carried. He did not wish to prevent an expression of opinion being secured from the House.

Mr Speaker replied that the motion for the second reading would be superseded and the Bill could come on at a future time. Mr Forbes: I have no objection to a vote being taken. Mr C. A. Wilkinson suggested adding to the amendment a provision that the charge should not operate before September, 1931, ns the growers had sown their crop. He wished to give them a fair deal, though he wanted more reasonable conditions for the community. The English 21b. loaf was •sold for 3id, equal to 7d for a 41b. loaf.

Mr McCombs: They could sell it here if this amendment is adopted. Mr Wiikinson expressed satisfaction that the Labour Party was at last alive to the position. ilr H. T. Armstrong: We prove this every year. Mr Wilkinson asked why the wheat pool declined to let the poultry-keepers have cheaper wheat last year when they preferred to export the surplus at a loss. He would like to know what they got for it. A member: Four shillings a bushel. Mr H. G. Dickie opposed the amendment. It was too indefinite, he said. If wheat was to be stabilised, what about other products? The Labour Party spent the whole evening advocating high duties on timber but turned to subsidies for wheat.

On a division being taken, the amendment was lost by 41 votes to 30.