WHEAT.

Press, Volume LXII, Issue 18690, 13 May 1926, Page 10

WHEAT.

GROWERS' ORGANISATION ADVOCATED.

THE COST OF MILLING.

The General Committee of the Canterbury A. and P. Association decided yesterday afternoon to call a meeting of wheat-growers to hear the millers' point of vfew regarding wheat values. The following letters were read from Mr F. It. Corson, the first being dated Mav oth:—

''ln the Press report of April 30th, referring to" the deputation which went to "Wellington, it says: 'lt was stated that they represented to the Minister that the millers could afford to pay 7s per ■bushel for wheat and sell their flour at £lB per ton, etc.' 1 shall be glad to know if this report is correct, because if so, it would seem the millers are prejudiced without their side of the case being heard, and there would, therefore, be nothing gained by the sug"ested meeting and discussion. ' Under date May 12th, Mr Corson wrote: — , ... '•Further to my letter of the otn inst: Should a meeting be thought desirable, I have to advise you I shall not be available after the 22nd inst. If a meeting be desired, then I must stipulate that no gram merchants or iheir representatives, be present the reason being that it was. requested that no miller should attend in his capacity as a member of the Produce Committee of the Chamber of Commerce, the conference arranged on April 21st. The millers are therefore entitled to ask for .similar discrimination."

Report of Deputation,

The chairman (Mr. J. 0. Coop) asked Mr 11. S. &• Kyle, M.P., i» report on the deputation to Wellington. Mr Kyle said that Mr Coop, Mr T. T. Gibson, chairman of the Produce Committee of the Chamber of Commerce, and himself had gone to Wellington as a deputation to the Hon. W."Downie Stewart (Minister for Industries and Commerce) and the Hon. 0. J. Hawken (Minister for Agriculture) to discuss the alleged dumping of Australian flour—thinking that was alleged by the millers. They were also to see if they could find out from the Government why millers were unable to pav 7s per bushel. They placed their views before the Ministers men- ' tioned, who had met the deputation with the fact that there Teally was no. clumping of Australian flour into New Zealand. If he remembered aright the figures were: February* '"■ 400 tons of flour; March, 1400 tons_ of flour. . The members were of the opinion that there ~"-fwid been no dumping. The deputation then asked if the Ministers could give .them any reasons why the millers could not sell flour .as cheaply as.Australian millers, and Mr Hawken, after consulting with the officer of the Industries and Commerce Department, was of the opinion that there was a big difference heween the cost of milling in Australia and New Zealand, but could not «ive us the reason for that difference. That appeared to be the crux of the situation. A cable message was produced stating that wheat offal—bran jnnd pollard—was cheaper in. Australia .than in New Zealand, and that was one ftuestion that was very hard to answer. .The Ministers gave the deputation to understand that they would not allow the dumping of flour-and that the Government could not see its way to i increase the duty on Australian flour. The Minister for Agriculture was very 'emphatic on that point and practically stated that if the duty on flour had to 'be increased, then he was of the opinion that they should take the duty off and let it in free, even if it was going 'to kill the wheat industry in New Zealand altogether. The deputation felt 'that it was up to the millers to give 7s per bushel for wheat and still be "able to sell flour.at £lB per ton, as ;they had done.in the past, when they 'paid 7b 3d per 'bushel. The Ministers •could not explain to the deputation why •]it cost £4 10s to £o more to grist wheat in New_ Zealand as compared .with the cost in Australia. He knew nothing of the remark referred to in Mr Corson's letter, and lie was surprised to learn,the contents of it.

Unexplained Disparity. It was the feeling of the members tli at there was a large disparity bei. tftcen the cost of the milling of wheat in Australia as compared with New ' Zealand, and the deputation was still "in the clouds" as regards that extra cost. Mr Coop said that he had seen a telegram from Australia giving the . price of wheat as 6s 9d in New South Wales, 6s B§d in Victoria, and 6s 8d in South Australia—sacks in. Mr Kyle moved that the letters he • received. They knew, he said, that "' millers had given 7s, and were giving dt to-day. That showed that they could mill at 7s per bushel. The motion was not seconded. Mr Coop said that at the conference on April 21st Mr Corson had said that he was prepared 1 to give them figures regarding the cost of milling wheat in New Zealand, and he (Mr Coop) ' thought that they might as well have them. They had called a meeting of growers, and it would ho a fair thing to hear the millers; it would not he fair to turn them down.

"Cards on the Table," Mr Kyle said that Mr Corson had promised the figures in ten days. Mr R. W. Lochhead said that it would: be" well to get Mr Corson's figures. The millers were entitled to be heard. Mr Kyle: Mr Corson that L day said he was prepared to lay his cards on the table publicly; now he wants to restrict it to growers. . We have merchants in the Association. Mr Coop: We cannot blow hot and • cold. . It is only a fair thing to give them a hearing. Mr Lochhead moved, and Mr J. Par- ' lane seconded: "That a meeting of , growers be called to hear Mr Corson." ~'.". Air Coop,, replying to a question, said . that* tho • meeting of April 21st had been called, and .the proposed meeting would be called on behalf of wheatgrowers; the 'A: and P. Association was no* taking any part at all. The wording of the motion was amended as follows:—"That a meeting of wheat-growers be called to hear Mr • (Jorson> reason, why millers are unable to pay 7s per bushel for wheat."

Organisation Needed. Mr T. A. Stephens said that the millers had given any amount of reasons why th«y could not pay 7s and. as farmers, they' had not been inclined to take much notice. The interests of millers and growers were not the same; the millers wanted wheat at a price ihat suited them. The cost of producing floor in a new, up-to-date mill was different from the cost of producing it in an out-of-date mill, and the figures ' '*rere not of the same value if th« mills * were not on an equal footing. They would be well-advised to leave matters alone;, talking about it did not seem ' to E«t them forward. The only solution " ,of the problem was to form a growers' organisation which would be in a posi-