THE PRICES OF WHEAT AND FLOUR

Dominion, Volume 12, Issue 220, 11 June 1919, Page 8

THE PRICES OF WHEAT AND FLOUR

A COMPARISON AVITH AUSTRALIA,

Sir,—l came across a copy of tho "Australasian" a day or two ago, in which Australian Govornment prices for milling and other wheats were quoted, as well as -millers' prices for flour: and bran and pollard, and was tempted to compare them with New Zealand conditions as fixed by tho Hon. Mr. Mac Donald and his Board of Trade. I have adopted a calculation not unknown to flourmillers throughout the world, and the comparison is as under: Australian Conditions. £ s. d. £ s.d. 48 bushels milling wheat weighing 28801b. at ss„ Government price for local consumption 12 0 0 Yields 1 ton flour weighing 20001b., and soils at 10 15 0 .*. 8001b. bran and pollard at 1255. and 1355. per ton respectively .;.-.. 212 0 - 13 7 0 Or an approximate profit per ton of , . M 1 0 Which rnav be increased to a small extent by tlie admixture of wheat under fair average quality or by producing a ton of flour from less than 48 bushels. New Zealand Conditions. 1 £ a. d. £ 6.d. 48 bushels at fo. 6d., Goveminent'price ■■ 15 J2 0 Yields 1 ton flour of , • 20001b., and sells at .:. 15 0 0 6001b. bran and pollard at 130s. and 170s. per. .ton respectively 3 0 0 Or approximate milling profit per ton flour of £i 8 0 Which may bo increased under same conditions as in Australia, quoted' above; and to which, in the case of Now Zealand, must bo added tho Hon. 1 Mr. Mac Donald h liberal but apparently unnecessary contribution to millers from the Consolidated Fund of £i 155., or a net milling pront per ton in New Zealand of £a 35., against a like profit in Australia of £1 7s. Tho comparison is striking, and appears to warrant a closer examination than Mr. Mac Donald or the Board of Trade is able to givo it. , With the unusually high prices tor bran and pollard sanctioned by tho Minister, it is well known that flour can be produced and sold at a fan; profit at the prico per ton of 48 bushels.of :wheat. We road about no contribution from the Consolidated Fund in Australia, and there should be none here, cither to millers or bakers. I was under the im-. pression that the Consolidated Fund could only be operated upon under Parliamentary authority, but Ministers nowadays appear to be a law unto themselves—l nm ' etC " THE MILLER OF DEE.