FOWL WHEAT

Evening Post, Volume CXIV, Issue 120, 17 November 1932, Page 7

FOWL WHEAT

GOVERNMENT PURCHASE

"WE DID ALL RIGHT"

MINISTER'S ADMISSION

An admission that the Government "did all right" out of the purchase of £25,000 worth of fowl wheat in Australia was made in the House of Eepresentatives yesterday by the. Minister of Internal Affairs (the Hon. A. Hamilton), when answering ■ questions concerning an Estimates item on the subject. Inquiry was made by Mr. M. J. Savage (Labour, Auckland West) as to whether the Department of Industries and Commerce would control the sale of the wheat to the poultry farmers,'and Mr. E. Semple (Labour, Wellington Bast) askef. for details as to the price at which the wheat was purchased, what the retail price was, and who had obtained the "rake-off." The Minister said the wheat had been purchased in the open market and he did not think there were any middleman's profits, any more than/was the case with similar transactions within New Zealand. The cost per bushel had already been made public. .Mr. Semple: I understand it was sold on the wharf at 5s 3d. The Minister said the wheat had been sold on the wharf to the wholesalers and it had been distributed to the retailers in the ordinary way. It was not the desire of the Government to interfere with the wholesalers. Mr. H. G. E. Mason (Labour, Auckland Suburbs): Could you not import it into Auckland as if it were on the same basis as the Conterbury price? The Minister: The Auckland people would have to pay' the steamer charges. There is no rake : ofE in the sense implied. If there is any, I think the Government has it. That is, the Customs Department has it. I don't think there is anything else in it. Mr. Semple: Well, I think you had more than-your share! The Minister:, We did all right. The Leader of the Opposition (Mr. H. E. Holland): At the expense of the poultry raisers! .-.■■■ Mr. Maso... suggested that the Government might have sufficient pity on the unfortunate people in 'Auckland to sell on the basis ;o'f' the Canterbury price wheat which had been purchased in Australia and not punish the poultry keepers,to the extent of.; the freight between:Lyttelton and Auckland. Without asking the Government .to sell at the: price ■ at- which the; Australian wheat was purchased; he urged' that it should be made-available to Auckland poultry'keepers at the price identical with what it cost tr land the Canterbury product in Christchureh or Lyttelton. . Auckland should not be penalised for being a long way from Cantorbury. ..••■■■■ The Minister said the wheat was delivered in Auckland at about 5s 3d a bushel, "whichj.he thought, was. cheaper than from the south. ' In- addition assistance.had been given the Auckland, people by lowering the price a little. .If they went too far there would-be a. lot of trouble. Already they had lowered the Canterbury parity for the Auckland people. .