KEEN DISAPPOINTMENT

Bay of Plenty Beacon, Volume 7, Issue 16, 19 October 1943, Page 5

KEEN DISAPPOINTMENT

BAY OF PLENTY MAIZE GROWERS

PALTRY GOVERNMENT SUBSIDY SEASON'S CROP JEOPARDISED Although the meeting was hurriedly convened:, a good l attendance of ltocal and Opotiki maize growers met on Thursday last to discuss with Mr R. G. Ffitcli, of the Internal Marketing Department the fixedi price for maize. Mr W. Sullivan, M.P. was also present. The chairman, Mr. W. A. McCrac&en, mentioned that farmers welcomed this opportunity to meet Air Ffitcli, as it was some two months since representations were first made to the Department for a subsidy. A committee had submitted statistics, showing convincingly, that production costs had far outgrown | the Government lixed price. The figures had been taken out over several- crops and averaged. This past season the all in average cost to put maize on the rail ran into £15 12s per ac.re, while the season ll).J8-.i9 when the price was fixed at 5/9 per f bushel the cost was £12 6s per acre. 'At to-day's price the production of a 50 bushel crop showed a loss of £1 4s (id per acre. . The chairman stated, it'was to be •cxpected, unless encouragement in. rprice was offered, he was afraid jnaize growing would, be neglected. The. Native Department during the past three seasons, had planted areas up to 800 acres, but his information was that it would be on a very minor scale this year. Sixpence Per Bushel Air Ffitcli said that the Avhole •question had been referred from the Internal Alarketing Department to the Price Fixation Committee which ihad empowered him to make an offer to growers in the Eastern Bay ><rf Plenty of 6d per bushel for the coming season.

The money would come out of the War Expenses Account and as a result of this assistance he had been asked to appeal to growers generally to maintain and increase their production in view of the very acute shortage which was anticipated in 1944. The niaize he. said was urgently needed to rep'lace barley and other stable foods now unprocurable, for pig fattening and poultry production. He trusted that farmers would realise the position and do their utmost to give lull compliance to the Government's appeal. The Australian yield would not be forthcoming this year and the Dominion would be forced to rely upon its internal production of stock foods. Mr Flitch itsked tho farmers to put their shoulders to the wheel and carry on iu spite of the !ae\ of encouragement. lie warned those present thai it would bej'utile asking for any increase in the 'subsidy as the Price Fixation Commitlee had intimated: that it would not reconsider its decision. Offer Criticised' •'We regret that the blood transfusion is so weak," said Mr H. C. MeCready. "Surely you don't expect the farmers to spark on such a weak oiler. If the shortage is so acute "why doesn't the Government do the decent, thing and give a .subsidy that will carry the farmer through and not make him work at a. loss." He went on to say that when the miner .and. the watersidcr wanted more pay they simply went on strike and there A\as no work done. The farmer on the other hand had been suffering i'rom an overdose of patriotism since tlie war began. Mr W. Sullivan's Remarks Mr W. Sullivan said that he: had repeatedly brought the. position of jualzc growers in Poverty Bay and. in the Bay of Plenty to the notice of the Minister, but had unfortunately l>een unable to expedite, their claims. -On the figures shown and without .greater assistance it was obvious that farmers were to-day being asked to grow the maize for nothing. He knew of no other business where tiie producer was expected to carry •on without a margin. I,l' the Government really wanted, the maize then it should be prepared to take the necessary measures to encourage its production. He felt confident tfhat unless some better proposal was forthcoming there would be little or no maize grown for market in this ■-area. The position in Poverty Bay was slightly easier, where, there was •a greater yield per acre. (Continued in next column)

As far as lie was aware there was no reason why the subsidy .should be limited, to Gd. Everyone knew that £750,000 was paid to keep down the price of sugar, yet this did not prevent that company from showing a million profit, to its shareholders. Retrospective Basis M>r MeCraeken criticised the committee's decision to base the cost on 1") per cent of ,the 1942 price. Tlie increased costs, prior to 1942 should have been taken into consideration. in answer to Mr Mc*Cready's question, Mr Fi'itcli said that the subsidy would be. on the net price to the growers. Mr P. Baird said that the word disappointment hardly covered his feelings. The Stabilisation Committee must be pretty narrow between the eyes to- come to the Bay of Plenity and ask them to grow maize at a lossi in order that other farmers should be able to grow pigs and poultry at a profit. They had asked for something fair and the Government had failed them badly. Mr Gault thought it would have been reasonable to extend the subsidy to include last year's maize. In answer to a question Mr Flitch said that the. Internal Marketing Department had taken every care to submit to the Price Stabilisation Com mittee the fullest tacts 'about- the difficulties of growers in the Bay of Plenty. All the. figures. sent forward by the local Maize Committee had been considered. Mr McCready: Don't they believe our figures. Not Disloyalists Mr Baird: We don't want you to go back to Wellington saying that we are a lot of disloyalists. We're not. We are willing to assist but we can't go on growing maize- at. a loss. Mr Ken R unci man for the Native Department said that his department had been just as disappointed as the other growers. They would be putting in 80 acres this year against 800 acres last year. Mr Baird: The plucking alone, last season was bad enough, hi 1941 I paid £:j per acre —last year T! paid £(i. Mr A. McGougan: A farmer to-day cannot grow maize unless, its from a patriotic point of view. The farmers would like to go on assisting the country, but the burden was growing mora and more unbalanced. Dairying was more profitable and a farmer thought twice before breaking up his pastures. Let Down Repeatedly Mr Alex McLean said that he had lost patience, with the whole position. Every year that the Government had appealed for greater maize production it had let the farmers down. He moved that in the opinion of this meeting of. farmers a subsidy of at least 1/6 should be forthcoming if maize production was to lie maintained on the same basis as last, year's crop. .The mover agreed after the whole question had been fully discussed to withdraw his motion in favour of a later one which received, a fuller measure of sup-

port. This was moved by Mr Doug Allen and .seconded by Mr Baird and read a'j follows: — That this meeting supports the committee's recommendations in seeking a maize subsidy of £2 10s per acre to coyer increased costs of production since the season 1938-39, and' that the Subsidy to be operative- over this past season 1942-43.