MANURE SUBSIDY

Timaru Herald, Volume CXXXVII, Issue 19512, 10 June 1933, Page 8

MANURE SUBSIDY

WIDER PROVISIONS DESIRED. OPINION OF A. AND P. COMMITTEE The opinion that the Government subsidy on manures should embrace all varieties instead of only superphosphate as at present, was expressed by the Committee of the Timaru Agricultural and Pastoral Association at yesterday’s meeting, when a letter received from the Invercargill Grain and Seed Merchants’ Association, by the Timaru Grain and Seed Merchants’ Association, was passed on to the Com-

mittee with the suggestion that it be supported. It was pointed out In the letter that if the present superphosphate subsidy was 8/10 per ton, the same figure should apply to all blood and bone products and that a subsidy of 7/6 should be granted on mixed fertilisers. Seeing that these would contain about 3cwt. of super on which the subsidy applied. It was thought too. that in the interests of those farmers who found that their soil responded better to guano, basic slag, sulphate of ammonia, etc., a similar subsidy should apply. In the opinion of Mr H B. S. Johnstone, the Committee might well endorse the letter and see how far it would get. In this district there was far more turnip and rape mixture used than straight out super, and it was desirable, he thought, that the provisions of the subsidy should be broadened.

Mr W. H. Orbell: “Is it suggested that the users or the makers should receive the subsidy?” Mr Johnstone: “It doesn't really matter.” Mr Orbell: ‘T think it does.”

The president (Dr. P. R. Woodhouse': “In New Zealand the makers receive the subsidy.” Mr Orbell: “I suggest that the users should receive it.”

Mr Johnstone: “If wp know that the companies are getting the subsidy all round, all manures will have to be made cheaper.” ■ Mr Johnstone moved that it be a recommendation to the Government that the subsidy be given on all manures. Mr P. R. Talbot said it might be as well not to interfere in the matter, as there was a danger, perhaps, of losing the present subsidy. There was a feeling a short time ago that the subsidy should be cut out. He understood that the money set aside last year to meet the subsidy had not been all used. Mr Johnstone said he did not think there was any danger of losing the subsidy, which was given to increase production.

Mr C. L. Orbell pointed out that Canterbury did not get the full benefit of the subsidy, as superphosphate was not used to the same extent as mixed manures. In reply to the president, Mr Talbot said he understood that the super which formed part of the mixed manure received the subsidy. Mr Johnstone: 'T can’t remember what the catch is there, but I know there is one.”

The president said that the Government might be in favour of super receiving the subsidy as it was manufactured in mandated territory. If. however, they gave similar consideration to basic slag, which came from Belgium, it might be termed as encouraging the manufacture of the foreign article. If they encouraged blood and bone, which came from New Zealand works, it would be to the benefit of everyone. Mr P. Porter said that if they received the subsidy on blood and bone that should be sufficient. Mr Johnstone’s motion was carried unanimously.