PRICE OF PRODUCE.

Pahiatua Herald, Volume XXVI, Issue 2790, 30 May 1921, Page 7

PRICE OF PRODUCE.

AN*D THE FARMERS’ UNION'

ADVOCATE. In the courne of a lengt-hly article the Editor of the Farmm’ Union Advocate lias some very direct- comment o'i rcceiit criticisms which have boon directed by a member of Parliament (Air G. Michell) and certain n-wspap-ers in regard to the price of butter. Exit ra etts a re. appended r—<

Let us have .a. few truths about the butter business. Is it not a fact that all hrougli the producers have condemned the principle of fixing the price of bu'eter othirwise tliaiv by (London parity, until the last arrangement was made? In wliose interest d’d the. Government fix the sed r.g price of butter? Was at no: for the consumer? Hie fact that- the niowey was actually paid to the producer v>.ns simply because it was a refund of the money he had not been allowed ir eolect from the consumer, and every honest men knows that to be the ease. AYe criticised the action, of the Government, because of the inequity of compelling producers to sell butter to the merchant- and the already wealthy cit»:keiL at 3d per lb below the value at which it was sold to the Imperial Government—which itself was a long way below London, parity ; and what did we got from politicans or newspaper, who knew on which side their bread was buttered. So far as the Government in concerned, it has done what it considered to be in the interests of the country, and though wo may differ as to the effect, we consider it decidedly wrong to level against it a charge of wilful favtmrrtism. At any rate, the facts are entirely against any favouritism being shown to producers. Its policy has been one of protection against undue prices—unduly high; and its policy to-day is protection against tho-re wno demand undue prices—unduly low. Hie fact of the matter is that it is

within the power of the Government to approach the Imperial authorities and' ask them to re-sell the remaining stocks at present market value

or, as Colonel AUtchell says, ‘hit the price it would sell it to the Chinese or any other people' that would pay for dt” ; hut could it with any seilf-reppeet do so? The least it could do would be to offer to share the loss : but then could the Government with any decency do even that in order to undersell the local producers? We aro quite satisfied to leave the public sa-

quite satisfied to leave public judge as to the morality of such an act. Now, let us think for a moment what would be the normal conditions of a falling market in London during the months of April to August. Usually all our summer make lias left the Dominion, and tlic winter make ds barely sufficient for our local needs. Under such circumstances- wliat influence has a market 15,000 miles away on the local price ? Absolutely none. There have been times when New Zealand butter has been brought back, from London and sold here when the- scarcity warranted that being done. Prioep here were then considerably in advance of London values, but those cases aro extremely rare. The only true conclusion of this matter is that the Government made the best bargain it could in the Interests of the consumers and' in» jurstic to the producers, and ordinary commercial morality demands that the Imperial stocks should bo shipped, away to America for preference, as part payment of England’s debt to that country. If America does not want it then ship it to England and give the British taxpayers the benefit of cheaper butter.