CHEAPER FRUIT.
USE OF PRISON LABOUR. Replying to criticism to the effect that growers would bo affected as a result of the marketing of fruit grown by prison labour under his proposed scheme, tho Hon. Dr. Findlay (Minister for Justice) declares that the complaints are based upon a wholly incorrect assumption. ]t would he remembered (lie continued) that by way of variation from the present tree-planting prison camp?, he suggrstcd the diversion of a portion of the labour employed there lo fruit tree planting camps north of Auckland. Ho suggested that the poor land might be prepared for closer settlement by converting it into -small fruit farms, the area planted in fruit to be about io acres, with or without a further urea added for other farm purposes, dairying, for instance. The work of preparing these fruit farms, if done by free labour, would either be unprofitable to the Government, or it tnev were lot or sold at a rental based on or at full cost of preparation, perhaps unprofitable to tho settler. Hence, just as in tho case of timber tree planting now done by prison labour, this fruit tree planting might ba done by the same labour, with a view to tho farm being Jet or sold to tho settler at a Te.ut or price which would easily enable him to make a living. It was never any part of his proposal _ that fruit should Iks produced by prison labour and sold in competition with that of existing growers, for us soon as possible alter the trees were planted the farms would be disposed of to settlors, who would, of course, themselves see to tho production and marketing of fruit. Planting fruit trees would no more compote with orchardists than planting forest trees would compete with sawmillors. J)r. Findlay went on to say that he believed that what would make fruitgrowing in this country highly profitable would be the scientific planting of suitable kinds of fruit from the best stocks. If we had a large area under such cultivation we could produce such a supply as would command the attention of the fruit markets of older countries. The existence of such a. large supply would produce all facilities in connection with production, treatment, and export which were found in Tasmania and other fruit-growing countries. Probably canning and other means of disposing of fruit would be developed. Fruit in New Zealand was too dear, Dr. Findlay added, and the purpose of the Government. should bo to reduce its cost, while not. affecting tho profits of orchardists, which, he recognised, were not very handsome. Ho _ believed that by the means he had indicated this country could not only put its fruit on the markets of tho Old World, but the price to tho people of New Zealand would be greatly cheapened, while the remuneration earned by growers would be increased. He was, of course,. concerned with the proposal only so far as it fell within his province as Minister for Justice. He Had learned that there was a very large frea of land lying within a radius of Ml or 30 miles of' Russell which would grow apples as fino in quality as any in tho world. Some of this' land ho had seen, and at present it was not worth more than 3s. or 4s. per acre.
Permanent link to this item
Hononga pūmau ki tēnei tūemi
https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/DOM19100613.2.18
Bibliographic details
Ngā taipitopito pukapuka
Dominion, Volume 3, Issue 841, 13 June 1910, Page 5
Word count
Tapeke kupu
558CHEAPER FRUIT. Dominion, Volume 3, Issue 841, 13 June 1910, Page 5
Using this item
Te whakamahi i tēnei tūemi
Stuff Ltd is the copyright owner for the Dominion. You can reproduce in-copyright material from this newspaper for non-commercial use under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International licence (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0). This newspaper is not available for commercial use without the consent of Stuff Ltd. For advice on reproduction of out-of-copyright material from this newspaper, please refer to the Copyright guide.