THE WHEAT PROBLEM.

Taranaki Herald, Volume LXVII, Issue 16610, 6 December 1919, Page 8

THE WHEAT PROBLEM.

NEW ZEALAND’S POSITION. A WORLD SHORTAGE. Recent cables refer to the keen demand for wheat from Japan and other countries that have hitherto _ not included this coroal in their national requirements, and also to the desperate position in Great Britain and the Continent as regards requirements of foodstuffs of all kinds. This surely points to tho danger of New Zealand becoming dependent on outside sources for her supplies of cereals. Recent advices from Groat Britain state that already farmel's are losing interest in wheat-grow-ing, owing to tho reduction in the control prices, while in spite of the terrible ordeal through which the Old Country passed during tho war, owing to her being so greatly imported foods, we find certain factions—to wit, the importing brokers —rejoicing that the inrush of wheat from foreign markets has resulted in the home price being reduced. No doubt this reduction is a groat benefit at the moment to tho masses, but surely something should be done to stabilise tho homo market. 'iho same advices tell us that the bureau of markets of the Department of Agriculture lifts assembled n survey of tlio world’s wheat supply, the general deduction from which is that there is a world’s wheat shortage of 36,170,000 bushpis. Among those countries which are. likely to have little or no surplus Australia is mentioned, so that New Zealand, with its record shortage, is likely to fare badly some time during 1920, the total estimated acreage given by the Government Statistician for the coming season being 143,030 as against 210,755 acres for tho present year. This reduction in acreage, basing the average yield at 25 bushels, gives us a. still further shortage of nearly 1,700,000 bushels of wheat. Tho Oamaru Mail the other day drew attention to the discussion in Parliament of tie Industries Committee report, in which Sir J. G. Hard (Hansard No. 6, page 486) stated; “This country requires a little over 7.000,000 bushels of wheat a year. Under the guarantee by tho Government of C-j 6d per bushel f.0.h., which was the final amount fixed, made to the v,•heat-growers of New Zealand, they have only produced- .-one 6.600.000 bushels. This country had ro buy in Australia over and above its own products to the amount of some 5,150,000 bushels in two years—l,lso,ooo bushels in 1917 and 4,000,000 bushels in 19-18.’’ Further, “I am speaking about the quantity, not the price. I said that the final price guaranteed was 6s 6d last year, and that the quantity required was short in New Zealand by some millions of bushels.” This statement has been circulated throughout Now Zealand by Press Association message, and is calculated to. do tho wheat-growing industry a great amount of harm by giving tho public tbe impression that it dues not pay New Zealand to grow wheat. The Mail goes on to say;—“Weaccept Sir J. 6. Ward’s figures that tho country requires some 7,000,000 bushels of wheat a year, but the New Zealand Gazette No. 96 shows that tho wheat yield for the Dominion in 1918-19 is 6,658,613 bushels, a shortage of approximately 400,000 bushels, not, as Sir J. G. Ward states, a shortage of some millions of bushols. In the previous year the yield for tho Dominion (Gazette No. 96} was 0,807,636 bushels. “Wc understand that the Government’s intention in buying 4,000,000 bushols was to make up the shortage and to create a reserve or carry-over—-a most desirable tiling. “Tile imports of Australian wheat to New Zealand this year arc approximately 1,000,0(X) bushels, making a carry-over of 600,000 bushels, plus a further 2.000,000 bushels lying in Australia, which will not ho brought over until next year. “In considering the question of giving up wheat-growing in New Zealand, it is well that tho public should consider what tho industry means to the Dominion. “Take as a basis Sir J. G. Ward's opinion (Hansard No. 6, page 487) that our wheat-growers, even with a guarantee of 5s Gd a bushel, are fully entitled to get at least what it costs per bushel for imported wheat. Compare to-day’s Australian price with tho production of lambs, etc. It takes about 270.000 acres to grow our wheat requirements at an average of 26 bushels per acre, and taking the. value at the present official Australian quotation, 8a per bushel f.0.h., plus freight and charges Is per bushel, equals 9s per bushel lauded in New Zealand without duty, giving a gross return of £ll 15s per acre, and a total value of £3;159,000.

"Canterbury and North Gtago wheatgrowing land," owing to climatic conditions, is unsuitable for dairying on a large scale, but will carry on an average 1$ ewes per acre. One hundred per cent, of lambs at 25s per head with 81b. wool at Is 3d per lb., and allowing for charges and shipping profit 12s 6d, giving a !iro=s return of £3 per aero on an annual export value of £BIO,OOO. "This is a. gross return from the land in favour of wheat to the. extent of £2,349,000 per annum, and if the farmer could get this price; there would be no doubt about getting sufficient wheat grown in New Zealand;; but the Government's policy has had the effect of limiting the price the wheat-growers would otherwise have got. This may be good policy, but it can be carried too far, as, for instance, the Government guarantee for next year's crop 5s 6rt, 5s Bcl Gs lOd, with a free market. Last year the free market gave the grower 2d per bushel extra, and knowing that the maximum prices of bread and flour must be fixed, and that there.can reslly be no free market for tho wheat, many farmers decided that tho reduction on the previous guarantee was not a fair thing and did not grow wheat. The result will bo a short crop and a larger importation for 1920. Australian farmers are guaranteed 5s per bushel for next year, which with expenses, freight, etc., would cost 6s 8d at"the mill, New Zealand, without duty, even if Australia was prepared to sell to us at cost price. Would it not have been better to have continued the guarantee of te Cd per bushel to New Zealand growers? "W'e have been bewailing tho drift of our young men to the North Island; yet if wheat-growing drops out of our industries there will bo less farm work. A large proportion of the expenses in wheat-growing is wages, ploughing, sowing, harvesting, threshing, carting, handling in stove and in shipping. Tho Railway department also received a considerable revenue from carrying wheat, which would be lost if we import. The importations would ho in the form of flour, ns the high prices obtainable in Australia for bran and pollard give the Australian miller command of the position, and this would increase the cost to New Zealand by over £250,000, with the- prospect of getting very little bran and pollard unless we paid extreme prices. In times of drought. Australia has bonclit pollard in New Zealand for over £lO poi- ton. "It should not be necessary to explain the danger of losing this important industry, but its value is not generally known. Politicians generally will not handle the problem, because encouragement moans higher prices and may mean dearer bread. Yet we are gradually losing the industrv. paying" higher price l ; to Anstrali.?, helping them to the disadvantage of our workers, and hcloin;r to place the balance of tho trade against ourselves. "ft is not a question of whether it pays the farmer better to grow sheep, but whether New Zealand can afford to an industry and import wheat worth on tn-dav's prices an annual value of £3,150.000.' replacing it with an industrv showing an annual export value of £810,000."