LETTERS TO THE EDITOR

Dominion, Volume 13, Issue 57, 1 December 1919, Page 9

LETTERS TO THE EDITOR

MR. A. L MONTEITR AND QUEENSLAND

Sir,—"Comraon-Sonse" in yours of yesterday starts out to abuse myself, I would ask "Common Sense" it he has any to address himself to the facts. I would refer "Common Sense" to the Commonwealth Statistician's bulletins and he ■will'find out tho position of Queensland and the cast of living in that State. I will set out the facts for "Common Sense" :The Ryan Labour Government came into power for the first time in 1915, and at onco set about redwing the coat of living, so much so, that by the timo the Hughes-Cook Federal Government came into power, about November, 1916, it had i educed the cost of living by 12.6 per cent. As giving some klea as to what the Ryan Labour Government really did in this direction the Commonwealth Statistician points out that in November, 1916, what could bo bought lor 225. lid. in Brisbane cost 275. 9d. in Sydney, 2G.s. in Melbourne, 255. 7d. in Adelaide, 255. 9d. in Perth, and 255. 2d.,in Hobart. In other words, the purchasing power of money in Brisbane at that dato was oalv about-Ml per cent, above the weighted average of tho six capital towns of Australia, as against 38J per cent, in Sydney, 30 per cent in Melbourne, 28 per cent, in Adelaide, 2SJ per cent, in Perth, snd 25} per cent, in Hobart. The Hughes-Cook Federal Government then took over tho price fixing the whole of Australia, and the cost of living commenced to jump ahead at an alarming rate; remember that ax tnis dato the fixing of prices was not in tho hands of tho Ryan Labour Government but ia-tho Federal Governments hands. Now, what.do we find? We find that taking tho Commonwealth Statistician s cost of living figures as at June, 1919, while the co*t of Uvins was allowed t* increase by 13 per cent, in Sydney, 113 per xent. in Melbourne, .II per cent, in Adelaide, ISI per cent, in Perth, and UJ per cent, in Hobart, the Hughes-Cook Federal Goyernnient has allowed the cost of living to increase in Brisbane by 225 per cent. In other words the Hughes-Cook Government has allowed the profiteers more gcope in Queensland than in any other State in Australia; when we remember the bitter antagonism that exists between tho Ryan and the Hughes-poolc Governments this aspect is a decidedly sinister one-. But after taking all these facts into consideration, the fact still remains that Queensland is still the cheapest living State in Australia to-day. Die Commonwealth Statistician shows that what can be bought for 28s. Id. in Brisbane costs 31s. ■lα , . in Sydney, 295. Id. in Melbourne, 28s. 2d. in Adelaide, 295. 2d. in Perth, and 28s. 10d. in Hobart. . The increase in wages is larger in Queensland than in any other State, as the following will show, and is between the years 1915 (when the Ryau Government came into power) and 1918: N.S.W., 225. 3d., Victoria 18s. 4d., Western Australia 18s. 9d., South Australia 225. fid., Tasmania 2-ls. 2d., Queensland. 2(is. Bd. So it will l)e seen that while tho cost of living in Queensland is the lowest in Australia the wages increases aro the biggest. ■ • ' . As to the question of, unemployment, there is more unemployment in New Zealand to-day than in Queensland, but because the Queensland iabour Government realised its responsibility and "has dealt with this question "Common Sense shows that he is a lwrn Tory by his objection. The Labour Party in this country also staud for "the right to work. If "Common Sense" knows anything about Australian elections ho will know that the Ryan Government faced the people and received a voto of confidence. The Labour Party has now called Mr. Ryan to take a place in Federal politics and he will continue his great work. With regard to tho matter bf State stations and State butcher shops, etc., always remember Jos. Billings's quotation, "That figures never He, but liars often figure." I have taken somo trouble to go into these matters, and I find that the above-mentioned quotation holds good. I will have much pleasure in dealin" with these matters at a later date.-I am, etc., Jin the Australian Official Y'oar Book, just issued, the Commonwealth Statistician gives a'lable shon'ing thati letail prices of food and grocories nave increased on an average us follows in the several Australian titalcs since July, 1914:— Ppi , cent. Queensland 60.6 New South Wales 62.8 Victoria 41.7 Tasmania 11.3 Western Australia 35.7 • South Australia 37.9 Tho absurdity ui Mr. Aloiw-'ith's sug&estion that the high range of price 3 in Qutensland is due to sinister tion of tile Federal price-fixing niuu»nery is sullicieiitiy expjscu, n tnat were necessary, by glancing an tnc extreme variation in pnce-iuci-eo-ttf in dilterent towns of tho Mate. The details given below are supplied' by the Commonwealth btatisticiaii. The ligiirw cover price-increases in Wie towns named, for tne sauve commodities,' and in the tame period are oovercU by tne preceding table:—

I , ;; , cent. Brisbane '.... iil.2 TooH'oomba 68.7. RoiiC'flamploii '. 51.8 ■ Charteis Towers 57.8 Warwick ti3.4 Obviously sucn variations nwist be attributed to Siitte as distinct nom i'ecoiai factors. Tlie grtui increase in food-prices in Queeushma us, coiuiku.u witn otner Stutea is the more t.\tr;ior<unary in view ol' the policy uiider wiiidi the Queensland Uovw'iiiiucii'j nas made and U mak-' ing forced purciuises oijucat suppli».-; fur tiiu State snops at imiuii less tuan ordinary market values. If it had not in thic way robbed one section of the. communiOy the cost of living figu.es for Quceiiolniid would sJioir to eveu lass advantage than they uo at predenb]