The Guardian (And Evening Star, with which is incorporated the West Coast Times.) TUESDAY, MARCH 4th, 1924. THE WHEAT PROBLEM.

Hokitika Guardian, 4 March 1924, Page 2

The Guardian (And Evening Star, with which is incorporated the West Coast Times.) TUESDAY, MARCH 4th, 1924. THE WHEAT PROBLEM.

Thu wheat growers of Canterbury, of whom there are about 6,000 have practically put in an ultimatum to the Government- demanding that the minimum price to be paid for wheat of good milling quality for the 1924-25 crop shall lie 6s for Tuscan, 6s 3d for Hunteis and 6s 6d for Pearl, all f.0.b., and that the existing duty and embargo be continued with the present rates of increment. The Government has been given 14 days to reply to this ultimatum, and it. was decided that if the prices were not acceptable the Conference should again he called to discuss the matter. The prices asked are in advance of those ruling now, and means an increase of 30s per ton of flour, and another Id rise in the cost of a loaf of bread. We had none of this molly coddling of any section of the community before tile war and it is difficult to understand why it- should ho necessary now. These artificial methods of sustaining an industry are econ- j omicnUy unsound. ’ In this case it

means that the wheat growers will not adjust themselves to tho altered conditions as the rest of the industries have had.. The wheat growers will not improve their systems or endeavour to reduce costs of production while the Government is willing to coddle them and why should they? Charity has a demoralising effect on a people or on a section of the people, and while the wheat growers through tho political charity of the Government can earn a living without any hardships they will do it, and if the living is not quite good enough they will insist upon more as they are now doing. The wheat growers should endeavour to find out why they are unable to grow wheat at as low a cost as the well founded belief that if the wheat growers used better seeds, better machinery and more scientific methods that they would suu<j«cd. But this involves trouble and

expense which they escape under the Government guaranteed price. Tho Government dare not acquiesce in Lhe iKmv--prices, or yield to the demands 6! the wheat growers. ’I he people have been forced to submit to a bread tax, involving £-100,000 per annum and to impose an additional £-100,000 on the people, while at the same time reducing the land tax to the farmers would he a political crime of the first magnitude Which the people will not loir-rate This system of guaranteed wheat prices is economically unsound and cannot he made to work out fairly. If the Government guarantees certain fixed prices for milling wheat it must necessarily expect in return a guarantee as to the acreage to be devoted to wheat. Assuming that the harvest of 192-1-2.1 is a bountiful one what becomes ol the surplus wheat. In tile Season 1921-22 there was a surplus of wheat, and the Government was left with apprnxi-, mutely 1,200,000 bushels for which there was no local demand. This wheat was sold at a. loss of about Is (>d per bushel, and tlie Japanese got the benefit. We unfortunate taxpayers had to stand the loss, anil stand the mortification of seeing the Japanese able to buy good New Zealand wheat- at a lower price than the unfortunate people of this country. The wheat was dumped on Hie Japanese and New Zealand paid lor the dumping. This is the new science of economics as propounded by tli. Reform Baity. If the Government possessed any moral courage, and desticil to study the interests of the ] eoplo as distinct from a. section ol tie community, the wheat growers would bo told to go about their business, that the Government would not guarantee any price or impose any embargo or other restrictions. 11 the wheat growers find it impossible to

grow wheat at a profit at present prices they can j ioduce other commodities .such as | rime Canterbury lambs, for which there is always a good nmrkci. The people of New Zealand will not go short of -bread even if the Canterbury farmers refuse to grow n. bushel cf wlieat. The merchants of the Domin ion will see to that. Not a- leaf or tea is grown in New Zealand, a lid vet there nas never been any shortage or' tea and the prices have never been excessive.