WHEAT AND CHAFF

Hokitika Guardian, 16 January 1925, Page 4

WHEAT AND CHAFF

I:\IPOBTATIOXS FROM ACSTBALIA AUCKLAND, dan. 12. Clamour in the South island for ad~ ditional protection for New Zealandgrown grain was the subject of comment on Saturday by grain merchants in Auckland. It was suggested in Christchurch recently that North island merchants were preparing to import Australian flour on a large scale directly the embargo oil imports is icmoved at. the end of February. Blenheim grain growers state that the Australians are endeavouring to capture the North Island lrude in chaff l>v sending regular consignments to the open market. Blenheim people were pressing for the restoration oi the duly on imported chaif. The sensitiveness of grain growers and others interested in the industry in the South Island was proverbial, an .Auckland grain merchant said. They appeared to he becoming hypersensitive during recent years, particularly when any mention was made of North Island consumers attempting to import grain of any sort from Australia. A regrettable feature was that every small transaction that took place in Australian grain was magnified beyond belief, and intensive propaganda was inaugurated with a view to inducing the (foverinnent to place restrictions on the importation of grain from the Commonwealth unless an altogether inordinate advance was made in the price in New Zealand. The suggested price for new season’s wheat in New Zealand was 7s a bushel on the price fixed for last season. Taking on: rent quotations in Australia, wheat from Hint country could not he landed at North Island ports under 7s (id a bushel, so that growers in the South need not fear any immediate competition from overseas. In any ease, they were assured of ail excellent price for the crop. As was previously stated, there was no inducement to import Australian flour, even at a substantial advance on pre-

sent prices. The statement that Blenheim growers were anxious to have the duty on chaff restored was also the subject of comment by a merchant. “i have some sympathy with the re(|iiest.” lie .-aid, “but remit- Iransaeiinns in Australian eiialf in Auckland do not warram the assampl ion Ihal ehalf is being sent regularly from I lit' Coinimniv, cailli lo Auckland on eoiisigiiiuenl to make whai-ever price may he offering. The fa< t s are Hint certain shipments of elm if came from Tasmania which did not come up lo speeilirat inns and the merchants refused to lake delivery. Space,however, had been reserved on vessels for the chaff and it was sent forward to the Open market in preference to having it returned to the consignors. That situation is not likely to arise again, and in any case i half of tile quality referred to- eoiiid not seriously eonim-te with -soul hern chuff. A feature that apparently lias been overlooked hv grain growers in the South Island is the position of the poultry farmers of the North Island, 'flu- poultry industry has expanded enormously in the Auckland district and very large quantities o-f fowl wheat are required by poultry farmers. 1 consider that every possible encouragement and protection should lie given to poultry farmers to obtain fowl wheat at a reasonable price. Apparently this can only be done by allowing the importation of fowl wheat front Australia. In ilie eireum.stam-e.s there is no justice, at ion for imposing a dumping duiy on (lour or wheat from Australia. As tar as eiialf is concerned, I .should like to see some duty placed on the imported article though the additional freight amounts to about 10s a ton. 1 hat is my considered opinion as a New Zealander though protected wheat, and duty-free chaff would he infinitely better for my business.'’