WHEAT GROWERS

Press, Volume LV, Issue 16434, 30 January 1919, Page 4

WHEAT GROWERS

CRITICISM OF GOVERNMENT.

MINISTER ASSAILED

The dissatisfaction of tho wlicatgrowerj :it the Government's attitude towards them was brought to a head yesterday morning, when a deputation front tho Noitli Canterbury Farmers' Union Executive, consisting of Messrs David Jones (president;, G. Sheat, F. J. Andrews, H. W. Johnston, F. C. Hack, l<\ Chamberlain, and 11. Evans waited upon the Minister of Agriculture (tho Hon. W. D. S. MucDonald) in the Government Buildings. Mr Jones referred to tJie Minister's remarks at a enni'ercnce in Christchurch, when lie, on Ixjhalf of the Government, made an oficr for this season's wheat of a minimum of Os Id per bushel, with a free market. Now tho Government proposed to abolish the duty on Australian wheat and to do away with the free market. He asked the Minister, as/ there seemod to bo doubt es to the interpretation of nis remarks at tho conference, if he would submit thorn to a judge, of the Supreme Court for .definition of their meaning. 1 On his (the speaker's) side, they had been submitted to tho best counsel in New Zealand, and tho opinion was that tho Government s present position in regard to the matter was wrong. He read ox tracts from a report of the Uhristchurch conference, which had not been published in tho Press. Mr Jones said that the conference, although doiiring 7s, accepted the offer of the lower price, largely because it would be a good thing to have a policy laid down by the Government as to duties, so that farmers should have protection for a number of years. Tho Minister denied that 6s -id was the Government's offer. The wheat-growers, said _ Mr Jones, had been given a clear indication that tho Cabinet would consider not only tho question of the duty as it stood then, but also the question of putting tho:n on a level with Australia by giving them very much increased protection. Thev were now astonished to liiul that not only had the Cabinet not given them what the growers stipulated, and what ho (the Minister) had agreed to 'put before Cabinet, but lie had-taken away (id that they had previously. The farmers had been told that they would get the additional protection that Australia had got, but now, having grown tho wheat, they found with amazement the Government's present interpretation of a "free market." In his opinion, a free market was a market .that was allowed to lake its natural course. It could not be claimed for one moment that a market in which the Government was io take off the duty would be allowed to take its free course. Mr.MacDonald, the Wheat Controller, had been sent to interview the Farmers' Wheat Committee to see if they would accept 7s per bushel for the season's wheat. The Minister: I sent him to see what was the lowest price you would accept. Wo always knew you would accept 7s ; Mr Jones: "When we got a free market there was a strong feeling that it might run from 7s 6d to Bs." He continued that Mr MaoDonaJd had asked them if they would accept a straightout offer of 7s for wheat. They agreed to that, and when they talked it over with the Minister it was very clear that it was in the Minister's mind that they were to have the tariff. The Minister: "I want to say here at once, distinctly, that I never authorised anyone to moke an offer of 7s, nor did I make tho offer myself." The Minister denied that the Wheat Committee had promised 7s. Mr Jones continued that later tlian that the South Canterbury Farmers' Union asked for arbitrators to be appointed in connexion with the fixing the price of wheat, and in this they were supported by tho North Canterbury Union. Mr w. G.' McDonald and Dr. Reakes were appointed as desired. Their verdict was in favour of giving the farmers fis lOd Tier bushel, not f.0.b., but. at Christchurch, Timaru, and ,oamaru—equal to about 6s lid y£.b. The growers thought that when this verdict was givctj tho matter was finished with. Referring to the Minister's interview with a "Press" representative (which was published yesterday), Mr Jones said he had dealt with the consumers' point of view, which was nothing to do with them. That was another question. The Minister said it was his duty to protect the consumer as well as*tho farmer. Mr Jones pointed out that the Minister had said that there were two methods of meeting the situation —making tho consumer pay, or paying out of the Consolidated Fund- He had also said that "if this season's crops turn out well —if they approach the average yield of ten ye3rs before the 6>l per bushel will bo very nearly up to the paying price, so far as one can see." That was, tnat the growers were expected to <?*ist—not to live. The position, shortly, was that they had a binding contract entered into with tho Minister on certain lines, and that th« Government would not now fulfil it. As regards the coming'season, were they to understand that the duty was again to be cut out? That was a question which the farmers wanted answered before any wheat was put into the ground again. The negotiations had been in operation for ten months. The farmers were,now ready for threshing, and did not knowwhere they stood. There was no question of what the Supreme Court judgment on the point would be. Mr Sheat asked whether the Minister's offer of os 6d, os Bd, and 5s lOd, for the next season's crop, would be ratified? They had good reason for doubting the Government. The Minister had. guaranteed the fanners that? the Government would not break faith. Apparently the prospective yield for Canterbury was close on a record, but things might, yet go against them. He recognised that the Minister was one among a dozen others in CaEinet, and he had a good opinion of the Minister's fairness. However, unless they wanted to. turn New Zealand into a sheepwalk, they must put the wheat-growing on a proper basis. THE MINISTER'S REPLY. In replying, the Minister said thai the matter had been gone into very carefully by Cabinet. Notwithstanding the offer of 6s 4d,.and a free market, it became evident that they were not going to get sufficient wheat grown in New Zealand to supply the country. '

Thev therefore, had to go outside New wheat, and the Governihfn" had been done... on several occa-sion-Tduring the last six or seven years. Mr JoncT: But not on a private purCl The Minister agreed that Xctr Zea-land-ought to be placed- on. a. parity vith Australia so far as duty on wheat was concerned, but it ys not * tion Cabinet could deal Tutii it was for Parliament to do it. He continued tint he had noticed some very ouf statements made by Fanners' Union members. One had said that ho (tho Minister) had ; do no more to kill wheat-growing in this c«untry any other man." He contended that there never had been such prices obtained in this country for wheat as smce he had been in ofl.ee. When it became evident that the Government would have to purchase outsido IN en; Zealand he nut the matter before the farmers ip i ascertain what they .thought a fanprice. They practically all stood out I lor 7* but the Cabinet never at any I time agreod to it. He appointed tho officials mentioned in an effort to get finalitv, but to say that they were appointed as arbitrators was a very farfetched interpretation. After consklering their report, Ihe Cabinet decided on the offer of 6s 6d per bushel. Re did not say one word at tho conference that he did not mean. Tho Govornment always understood that when thev came to be the buyers of wheat for thi< country it was quite within thoir prov'nee to remit or impose duty. He was willing to submit Mr Jones's statement and interpretation thereof to his colleagues on his return to It'was unfortunate that the matter hau drifted so long. He had tried as hard as anv man to get a reasonable understanding If the Government were advised that the matter should bo clcared up by a commission, he would put the matter before them. The whole matter, continued the .Minister, was a purely business transaction between the fanners and the Government and even if the Government had failed to fulfil their part of the contract surely there was a remedy for the farmers without bringing it into the Press and getting Press criticisms all over the country? His speech at the conference was never meant to deceive the farmers of this country. When he mentioned 6s 4<l and a tree market he hoped that would bring sufficient wheat for the country's requirements —but it did not. He was, however, convinced—he had got as many acres of wheat as anyone there, probably— that 6s 6d was a payable price. Continuing, he said if overs' man had to give his business to the Press then they would all liave to be very much more careful as a general rule. They had all been very confidential with each other.- So far as the Government was concerned, he hoped there would be. no taint o! unfairness in the proposition. He had no feeling in the matter. They all had an opportunity of getting a better man than him in a few months. Mr Jones: That will be too late for this season's crop, though! (Laughter.) Helen'ing to Mr Jones's remark that •'it was nothing to do .with the consumer," he said it was,-because it was on behalf of the consumer that the arrangement was' made. The consumer was in the' question, or they would never have bothered. Mr Jones: My point is concerned with our agreement. Tho consumer does not alter the agreement. The Minister said that no Government should penalise the farmers or any section of the public for the benefit of the rest. If barriers were going to be put up against the importation of foodstuffs into this country and'the value of land sent up, it was riot going .to pay the farmer very well. He had' hoped, to come - ■to a settlement without reaching the stage they had come to. He could only hope that the eventual • solution of the whole tiling would bo "satisfactory. .Mr Jones stated that the present i meeting would have been in private but for the Minister's interview fn "The Press." The public were entitled to 'both sides of the question. He would like a definite statement as to whether the duty was to be taken off next season's wheat. They were "right into the business now," and wanted to know where they stood. He had been asked to send a letter to cach of the Cabinet Ministers setting one the facts, and he hoped it would help to elucidate the matter. The. Minister said he was not prepared to say what the Government was going to do with regard to the duty. They had power to remit it, but not to increase or abolish it, except with the authority of Parliament. Whatever was the market value of wheat, if it was over and above 5s 6d, 5s 85, and os lOd, the farmers would <»et the benefit. Kef erring to his interview with Press," the Minister said that he was simply replying to what had been said already in "The Press." If thev read the cable reports that came to Wellington they would sec that he was quite justified in saying what, lie did. In reuly to another question he said that if there was any alteration in tho present price, it would be for the whole of this pea son's wheat. There could be no differentiation between the farmers.

The deputation thanked the. Minister and withdrew.