Disposal of Maize Crops

Bay of Plenty Beacon, Volume 4, Issue 165, 8 October 1941, Page 5

Disposal of Maize Crops

PRIMARY COUNCILS SERIOUS VIEW

THOUSANDS OF BAGS UNSOLD

"We are living in muddling ~4imes, so we can't expect too* much of a hearing in any case."' These words, uttered by Mr Holmes (Gpotiki representative) at the special meeting of the Eastern Bay of Plenty Primary . Production Council, seemed to re-

fleet the general opinion of mem-

hers when the question of disfposing of the maize crop, eighty thousand bags, which are steadily deteriorating in the growers cribs throughout the Bay of Plenty was discussed 1 .

The situation was briefly reviewed by the chairman, Mr R. Ruddick, of Taneatua, who stated that the farmers in good faith had, in response to the Government's appeal for more maize, stretched a point, and in spite of all the difficulties then confronting them just doubled the production in order to overcome the necessity of importing maize. Ihe plucking harvest had brought fresh ' troubles with the labour shortage and now when the crop was harvest«d the prospect of disposing of it appeared to be getting more and more remote. From what he could gather the great problem was pre sented by the unfavourable selling price as compared with the Australian wheat. If this commodity could be restricted, and the maize given prominence the position might correct itself. Bay Produces 92,000 Bags From a recent survey the maize crop in response to the ajjpeal had•jumped from 35,330 bags last year to 92,840 bags this year, in the Bay of Plenty. (Wliakatane-Opotiki figures were 25,800 and 50,904 bags respectively for the tAVO seasons). Of ithis the great bulk had yet to be disposed of and with the market so unfavourable farmers were becoming alarmed in spite of the Government promise of a guaranheed price. Only 8500 bags had been sold from the Bay of Plenty as yet, while the position was further aggravated by the production increase in the Gis'borne district which had risen from 45,000 bags to 60,000.

Mr H. Cv McCready gave his opinion that any appeal for assistance would receive' scant consideration from the Government if the representations of the Farmers' Union un;der the same head Avas any criterion. He contended, that the main -causes of the slump in maize sales was due to the amount of imported '.South African maize by the very Government which had appealed for increased local supplies. The figures •disclosed showed that the position was very serious and there was everv reason to believe that the maize • would not be sold for a very long time. Imported Wheat Cheaper It was contended by other speakers that while it was possible to sell imported Australian wheat cheaper per bushel than home-grown maize the position was likely to remain acute. Unless sales were subsidised it appeared that there would be a real difficulty in clearing the present stocks. It was also "stated that a subsidy had been requested in certain auarters but had been turn-

Ed down flat, as the Government re- «: 1 upon the profit it made on the ported wheat to off-set the submade to the South Island wheatgrowers.

Mr McCracken contended the whole matter should be taken up by the National Council of Primary Production and the Government forced to pay attention. The Minister of Agriculture, he said, had practically promised a Guaranteed Price but farmers should remember that that price would only be forthcoming when the maize was sold. Present indications were that this would not be for a very long time.

Farmers were at jjresent in a "quandary. It was time to prepare land for next year's crop but unless something definite was done there would not be cribbage room for the new harvest. He estimated that the outlay was from £7 to £8 per acre.

Why Was Maize Imported ?

The question which interested the -Electing was raised by Mr J. L. ißurnett, who asked the reason why,

supply.

A 'Blood Transfusion'

Not a Tin of Fish !

DISTRICT FARMERS ALARMED

in view of its appeal, the Government persisted in importing maize from South Africa.

Strong criticism of the Government's action was voiced by several speakers, but it was pointed out that the order maj r have been executed by contract spread over a term, or else that the authorities had not anticipated the response being so great. Mir Thompson (Opotiki) said that if farmers met with a rebuff this year, on top of all fheir other difficulties they would swing away from maize altogether. Then there would be a new problem created by the other extreme of having insufficient

"We're talking about a blood transfusion; that's all subsidies are! With imported wheat selling at 6/7 per sack and our own grown maize at 7/-, you can't expect healthy sales. We should get down to things that affect us directly, and I want to know why when maize was selling at 6/3 in Whakatane they were asking 9/6 in. Rotorua —a place not fifty miles distant. Surely that could be obviated; the handling and transport costs should not have built it up to that figure. If we get the price of our maize down to a right level then we'll sell it alright."

Mr McCrackcn said the charge was probably increased by reason of the cost of the bag. He would urge the meeting to make the strongest representations to the Government, setting out the position in full and asking that the matter be taken up vigorously with a view to having the markets cleared before next season's maize came to hand. Representations to be Made Mr McCrackcn's suggestion was endorsed by several speakers and it was decided to write direct to the Director of Primary Production giving figures and data regarding the volume of maize sold and held in the crib and requesting him to take the matter up with the Government fts one of the greatest urgency .

Opotiki, declared Mr Thompson, was actually in a far worse position than Whakatane, as owing to the extra freight the marketing price was higher. This would effect the sales. However, he considered the Government directly to blame, as he with other canvassers had gone round the district urging farmers to grow greater crops. The Government had got them into the position nnd it was now up to it to get them out of it.

The Government, declared Mr McCready, didn't care a tin of fish. What was needed was a vigorous endeavour to lower the price so that the average man (the small buyer) would buy in preference to imported wheat. If the poultry growers could only be_ persuaded to take one bag apiece tliey would assist the position. He favoured subsidising the buyer, rather than the grower in this instance, and he thought that if the maize could be sold cheaper it would stimulate the sales rather than if it was maintained by a subsidy to the farmer.

While several speakers were employed in arguing that a subsidy to either the buyer or the seller by the Government amounted to the same thing, it was decided to commit all future correspondence under this heading to the special maize committee, with power to act at once upon all urgent developments.