WOOL

Poverty Bay Herald, Volume LV, Issue 17173, 1 February 1930, Page 6

WOOL

(To tho Editor of tho Herald.) Sir,—Your leader of yesterday on the above subject should arouse the most conservative of our farther organisations to action. The wool grower is in a most unenviable position at present. His wool is being sold at just about one-half the cost of growing it, and under tho present unorganised condition of the wool industry the grower is almost helpless to prevent this. For some years now I have advocated the formation of a Wool Board which would have power to market all the wool grown in New Zealand on a scientific and economic basis. Tiie present cost per lb of wool grown in Poverty Bay is 14.U1, which lias been proved by actuarial inquiry. I propose that a Wool Board shall have power to deal with all manufacturing centres to fix an upset price for every class of wool, such wool to be valued by two experts and an umpire, as under the comimnndeer, or B.A.W.IFA. This would be no experiment but an actual proved success. I would give as a basis of values, on count, yield and condition, as follows: 36’s yielding 75 per cent.. Is; 40’s yielding 73 per cent., 13d: '44-46 yielding 70 per cent., 14d ; 48-50 yielding 68 per cent., Isd. These prices are slightly below cost of production and would form the basis of valuation below which no wool would be sacrificed. Of course the yield and condition of the wool would vary according to time of shearing and conditions under which it was grown and the valuations would vary accordingly. Many of the opinions expressed by so-called brokers are quite misleading. ' T fear many of these opinions are inspired from' a 'buying source and are not unbiassed. The indst valuable help yet given has come from Bradford. Three years ago, when president of the British Wool Federation, Mr. \V. H. Hunter said: “If Bradford would but scrap its obsolete machinery from 3,0 to 20 per cent, could be saved in the process of manufacture.” At the conference between wool growers and rr a nufat furors iasi month in Bradford Mr Tilin'ev said: “If the public could buy wool and woollen goods at a parity of'manufacturers’ cost the sale of woollens would be. doubled or trebled without advertising.” Now, sir, it is the. duty of the British Government to find out where this ungodly profiteering comes in. I suggested this thing in my, last letter in your paper. It certainly is not the woollen mills that are making all the profit. Where is it. then? The point raised in your leader re unemployment and taxation is a most important one. and should spur Llio Government to immediate action, for its own preservation Our merchants and business men should join with the sheepfarmev to demand the setting'up of such a board and also for an. inquiry into profiteering. The price of money and cost of production are all against the farmer, causing a slacking off in employment. I am afraid both the Government and tho business men of Gishorno will very shortly find this out. I understand the Government of South Africa is prepared to act with other Governments, to make tho scheme of sale by valuation one which shall embrace all important wool-growing countries. If this can be done wo shall have* stabilisation of prices, at any rate, as near as can be brought about. If it is not done, the fanner will continue to he as a rabble in the hands of an organised nnnv of exploiters. I am, etc., FRANCIS STAFFORD.