OUR PROSPERITY.

Gisborne Times, Volume XXV, Issue 2051, 11 April 1907, Page 1

OUR PROSPERITY.

IS IT SOUND AND PERMANENT?

LONDON, February 22

A city frioud who occasionally looks mo up to impress upon mo his views—which ho always insists arc those almost, universally prevalent in the city—about Now Zealand and its

people, called in a day or two ago with the newest issue of the New Zealand Year-hook in his hand. “I’ve just boon looking up your

latest Now Zealand statistics,” ho said. “1 suppose you still consider your colony prosperous?” “Oh, yes; certainly.” “And you think the prosperity is progressive and permanent and likely to continue so?” “Don’t you?” “Well, just look at this: Here’s the new volume of statistics just out, so we’ll see. Now, observe, the value of the wool exported from New Zealand in 190-5-6, the latest period for which the returns are available, was .£5,381,333, whereas the value for 1898, seven years previous, was only £4,645,804 “Well, there’s progress, .surely?” “Ah : but now turn to the quantities. In tho year 1898, Now Zealand exported 150,401,9561 bof wool; in 1905 only 146,869,7671 b, or nearly 4,000,0001 b less than the export of seven years before. So that, as a

matter of fact, New Zealand’s export of her chief product has actually decreased heavily during the seven years, and tho increase in total value is due wholly and solely to tho higher prices that have happened to prevail.”

“I see what yon mean—well?” “Well, look at the number of the sheep in the colony. 'That was ‘10,342,727 in 1902 ; it is only 19.826,024 in 1906. Not much progress there, is there? Or. ta'ke the last ten years: In 1896 New Zealand had 19,138,493 sheep; in 1905 only 19,130,875, or actually nenly 8000 fewer! Then, if you take the number of frozen sheep and lamb exported you will see that the total was 4,922,622 three years ago, but only 3,605,592 last year—a big falling off! And you must bear in mind that wool and mutton constitute something like 56 per cent of tho whole exports of New Zealand.” “But what is your deduction from all this?”

“Not' anything to New Zealand’s prejudice, but a wholesome lesson as to her policy. You see all this boasted prosperity is virtually due to

enhanced—l do not say necessarily inflated—London prices. The colony is producing less in quantity than she did some years ago, but the appreciation in values has made her export totals wear a flattering appearance which, in fact, is merely a rise ill London prices. Now tlicso values are always fluctuating, and any day we may see a slump after the long boom. The fluctuations are due to causes quite outside of New Zealand’s control or regulation, and often outside of British influence. Thus, if for any reason a fall in prices should occur, New Zealand’s

largely decreased export of wool and frozen meat which, as I have said, constitute some 56 per cent of her total export trade, will mean a proportionate reduction in total values. . A eolony—eif,factory position when her apparent prosperity" and-progress rest mainly on prices on this side of the world,, which may, through accident or design, be unduly inflated, and which are li.ndo at any time to be unduly depressed “No doubt, but what morai do yon deduce ?” “This, that far more strenuous efforts ought to be made by tho Government to increase with all possible rapidity tho volume of the New Zealand exports. The excuse that tho present 1 falling off in the exports of wool and of mutton is due to previous over-exportation will not 'wash because even a very cursory examination will show that New Zealand’s increase has been nothing like what it ought to have been in the past ten or twelve years. And one reason, as I take it, is the failure of tho Government for one reason or another, to promote a sufficient extended settlement and cultivation of the land. I hear many complaints of the difficulties that newcomers • find in get- ! ting hold of land and in getting upon ; it, and in gettug it opened up ‘Some of my New Zealand friends : point to vast areas in the Auckland ■ province alone that QUflihf 1° 'yielding any amount of wool ami mutton and butter and cheese that are lying idle. Why don’t the New •Zealand people stir up their Government and make them open up more land and give increased facilities for ;settlement? Recollect' that the time ■has now been reached when full benefit of what' was done by the early settlers in the way of settling and ■opening up land, clearing bush, cultivating, etc., is being reaped. 'Then consider New Zealand's advantages of climate, soil, and a picked population, and you will realise that itho real progress of the colonvs is tnothing like what it ought to lie ni (such 'favorable circumstances. New 'Zealand needs more people and more •land in cultivation, and unless she • gets both, her apparent progress, based on mere high prices of produce. cannot be regarded as entirely sound and satisfactory. Do point this out and stir thy people up! :’ “I will tell them wliat you sm,v, afc

■ any rate.” ; “There are other points, hut I ■will only mention one: Rook at the :railway returns. Seven years ago the New Zealand railways paid £3 4s lOd per cent, interest on their cost; last year £3 4s Or!. 'l’wO years ago the return was £3 11s Bd. J his isT surely not ‘progress’? IVliat is the reason? Well, 1 suspect that it can he found in the percentage of working expenses column. In the year 1896-7 the working expenses absorbed only 61 per cent of the receipts; in 1905-6 the expenses ate up 69 per cent of the gross revenue. That is a very big difference—more than 12 per cent to the bad in ten years. Whether it 1)0 due to inflation of wage rates, or what 1 don’t pretend to say, but there is the result in black and white official

figures.” “Suppose we ask Sir Joseph Ward when he arrives next month?” “Very good idea. We will.”