PROTECTED FARMING.

Waikato Times, Volume 109, Issue 18347, 5 June 1931, Page 6

PROTECTED FARMING.

Peouliar interest is attached to a leading article in the Preston, Lancashire, Guardian, on the subject of protected farming In that it has a direct bearing on the protection of wheat in this country. The article, whloh is dated April 11, states: “Rumours have been strong lately that the Labour Government was about to Introduce a milling quota for English wheat. Quite recently they have been considerably strengthened by the support given to them in the ofllolal Labour daily newspaper. Now It is apparently certain that a 15 per oent. quota is to be considered by the Labour Cabinet next week. If adopted this 15 per cent, proposal would mean that all flour used in English baking would have a minimum content of 15 per cent, milled from home-grown wheat. In spite of the Large amount of Tarlfflst Press propaganda it is very doubtful If the Cabinet will adopt any such quota suggestion. There are two main objections. Immediately, on the authority of the managing director of Appleby’s, the supply of English wheat In the country is not sufficient to make up a quota of 15 per oent. When that deficiency had been made good there would still be verygrave objections to the Imposition o, any quota system. It would be a direct toll on one or all of three classes of the community for the benefit of a minority of wheat growing farmers. For to make English wheat profitable on the quota basis experts reckon that an additional 20s to 25s would have to be put on the quarter price. Who would pay It? There might be a direct toll taken froih the taxpayer. Much more likely the additional price would have to be paid by the wheat and flour users. Bread would be appreciably dearer. So would the offal which forms so large a part of poultry and cattle food. Moreover as one-third of the whole of British wheat Is used now for feeding poultry it Is clear also that poultry wheat would rise In price. These three Interests —the taxpayer’s, the householder's and the farmer's and poultry farmer’s —should he sufficient to give the Cabinet pause. In the Industrial areas the true cry of ‘dear’ bread is more than a Government much more popular than this would care to face. Meanwhile In the large non-wheat growing areas—the bulk of the country—there would be loud outcry at a proposal which afflicted a majority of farmers for the sake of a wheat industry which represents in the value of its output only •i per cent, of our farming production and in fact is considerably smaller than the value of the egg harvest alone."