RISE IN PRICE OF BREAD

Southland Times, Issue 23377, 8 December 1937, Page 6

RISE IN PRICE OF BREAD

Government’s Policy Criticized

“INTERFERENCE AND MUDDLEMENT”

PAYMENT TO MILLERS TO MEET HIGHER COSTS

(From Our Parliamentary Reporter) WELLINGTON, December 7.

A protest against the increased price of bread was made by members of the Opposition during the discussion on the Supplementary Estimates of the Department of Industries and Commerce in the House of Representatives tonight. This took the form of an amendment to reduce the total vote of £39,120 by £5. The amendment was lost on the voices, no division being called for by the mover, Mr S. G. Smith (Nat., New Plymouth).

An explanation of an item of £30,000 for the wheat industry was sought by the Rt. Hon. G. W. Forbes , (Nat., Hurunui) and Mr H. G. Dickie (Nat., Patea). The latter pointed out that £150,000 was provided for the wheat industry on the Main Estimates and asked if the additional grant was designed to keep down the price of bread. The Minister of Industries and Commerce (the Hon. D. G. Sullivan): Yes. Mr Dickie: If that is the case I hope something is going to be done to keep down the price of fowl wheat. The grant of £30,000, said Mr Sullivan, was to meet the increased cost to the millers. The sum would have been more properly described as assistance to the flour industry, instead of a grant for the development of the wheat industry. The millers had asked for an increase of 25/- a ton to meet additional costs arising from new awards. After an exhaustive investigation the department had decided they were entitled to 5/- a ton and the grant of £30,000 represented that payment. After moving the amendment to reduce the vote as an indication that the price of bread was too high, Mr Smith said the interference and muddlement of the present Government were responsible for the present high price. “I challenge the member for New Plymouth to show that there has been any muddlement by this Government,” said Mr Sullivan. “The wheat, milling and baking industries are in a sound condition and well satisfied with the administration of the Government. This amendment is just a stunt on the part of the member for New Plymouth.” Mr Smith: Don’t lose your temper. Mr Sullivan: Oh, be quiet. PRAISE FROM INDUSTRY The bread being sold in New Zealand today, added the Minister, was probably the cheapest in the world. There was not a scrap of justification for the amendment. During recent weeks he had received resolutions from all sections of the industry commending the Government what it had done. Mr Smith’s criticism was most unfair, most unjust and one hundred per cent, incorrect.

“The Government has been successful in raising the price of a four-pound loaf by not less than a penny and up as much as twopence in some rural districts,” said the Rt. Hon. J. G. Coates (Nat., Kaipara). “That is a direct result of Government interference. We now have something like a subsidy of £lBO,OOO to keep down the price of bread.” Mr Sullivan: Your Government paid nothing to the wheat growers, but something like a million to the millers. Mr Coates: The Government is hoist with its own petard. Its administration of the wheat and milling industry is the clearest indication of incompetence and barren intelligence. Mr Dickie said that New Zealand had the dearest loaf in the world. In addition, housewives all over the country were complaining about the quality of the bread and flour. Mr Forbes said the Minister had visited the wheat growing areas of Canterbury and it was only fair to say that the growers had passed resolutions expressing appreciation of what the Minister was doing. Mr Sullivan said all complaints about the quality of the flour had come from districts where blending was permitted. Scarcely any complaints had emanated from the South Island, where all New Zealand wheat was used. After other speakers had expressed their views the discussion lapsed and the vote was passed.