Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

DUTY ON WHEAT

SLIDING SCALE FAVOURED MANUFACTURERS’ VIEWPOINT. MOTION TECHNICALLY IMPOSSIBLE. [ Per Press Association. ] WELLINGTON, Aug. 20. When a motion was submitted to the New Zealand Alanufacturers’ Conference to-night supporting a sliding scale of wheat duties it was favourably discussed by some of the delegates. It was then pointed out that no motion could be submitted unless by unanimous consent as due notice had not been given prior to the Conference. The President, from Auckland, agreed that such was the case and, while not putting the motion, said that it had been in order it would have been carried by a large majority of the delegates. The motion, submitted by Air I. Woolf (Canterbury) was: “That this Conference supports a sliding scale of wheat duties and considers that the w’heat industry should receive such protection as is necessary to maintain the welfare of an essential industry vital to the welfare jf the Dominion; that a copy of this resolution be forwarded to the Prime Alinister and to the Associated Press of New Zealand.”

Air Woolf read a lengthy extract from the evidence given before the Wheat Commission showing the importance of the industry to Canterbury and Otago and the amount of labour engaged by the industry. He realised that there was some opposition from the poultry industry but there were over 6000 wheat-growers, while there were only about 130 individuals affected who made a living entirely by poultry farming. If the wheat industry was not carried on it would mean ruin to Santerbury and Otago for some years to come. He appealed to delegates to look at the mat ter from a national aspect. If they could not help the wheat-grower then they should let all foreign wheat come in and Russian butter also. Through Russian dumping, wheat was at the lowest price for 150 years. Air R. L. Hutchinson (Christchurch), seconded the motion, saying that an economist had worked out what was gained by having a cheap loaf and found that the gain to the (Dominion wa. about a quarter of a million. He then worked out the other side and found that the loss to the Dominion by allowing cheap stuff to come in was half a million. They should maintain wheat growing as a matter of principle. The president, Air G. Finn (Auckland), agreed that to take away the duty would endanger the wheat industry of Canterbury. Alany in the North Island were opposed to a wheat duty, but he was not. He knew the price had been on the high side, but that had now been rectified. Wheat-growing was essential to Canterbury, for no other crop could take its place and was a crop which enabled the farmer to use his time throughout the year. Could they imagine what it would mean to manufacturers of the Dominion if the duties were removed? Air S. Takle (Auckland): This motion has been sprung on the conference and I am not prepared to vote on it. The secretary, Air J. Findlay (Auckland) drew attention to the rules, which provide that no question shall be decided or voted upon unless communi cated as a remit to all associations one month before the Conference. Questions not covered by remits may be discussed but no resolution may be put unless with the unanimous consent of all affiliated associations, whether represented at the Conference or not. Air Woolf: We should show the farmers of New Zealand that we are sincere in our goodwill towards any New Zealand industry.

Mr F. Campbell (Wellington) moved that the vote be taken and suggested that Air Takle should refrain from voting. Mr Findlay said the Government had already reached a decision in the matter and there was no need for the Federation to pass the remit. Further, they had no instructions from the Auckland branch and could not commit that association.

Air Woolf suggested that the motion be put and a majority vote taken. Any objeciton could be noted.

The President ruled that the motion could not be put, but had it been sent forward in time as a remit he thought it would have been carried by an overwhelming majority.

Permanent link to this item

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/WC19310821.2.92

Bibliographic details

Wanganui Chronicle, Volume 74, Issue 197, 21 August 1931, Page 8

Word Count
694

DUTY ON WHEAT Wanganui Chronicle, Volume 74, Issue 197, 21 August 1931, Page 8

DUTY ON WHEAT Wanganui Chronicle, Volume 74, Issue 197, 21 August 1931, Page 8

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert