CONTROL OF PRICES.

Manawatu Herald, Volume XLII, Issue 2133, 27 May 1920, Page 3

CONTROL OF PRICES.

PRESIDENTIAL OPINION AT FARMERS’ UNION CONFER’ENCE.

“A point of great importance to ns is the question of the control of the prices of produce." said Mr 0. L. Marshall, president of the Wellington Provincial Farmers’ Union, at a conference in Ecilding on Thursday. “It is obvious that it is impossible to lix the price of any crop a year in advance of the harvest. The cost of producing a. bushel of wfieal. for instance, depends largely upon the season. If blight or an unfavourable season reduces Ihc yield per aero the cost per Im-hrTL increased, hut; with a Hxcd price the grower has no hope of recovering In's loss by an increased selling price, and in (he event of a bountiful your the farmer can sell at a less price and still make a profit, and the public get the benefit, Al the present lime when the grower is only allowed 7s Dd per bushel for his host wheal, how is it (hat poultry keepers are being charged lbs (id per bushel for fowl wheat in some places 1 ? Tins is another example of how the practice of controlling prices seems in he ineffective in protecting the consumer while discouraging the producer. Controlled prices means doing away with competition, which is the ‘soul of trade.' Unless there is unrest riel ed trade the tendency is to increase the margin between what (lie producer receives and what the consumer pays fur Lite finished article, because it is impossible lo lix a fair margin of profit for every process which (he produce goes through after it leaves the farm. As an example, lake the case of hides. We had lo accept about half (he price which the hides would have brought in the world’s market so that bools could be manufactured at a certain standard price. Cattle owners, including dairymen, were mulcted of a. wry large sum of money to make this possible, hut very few of us have seen the boots, much less had the satisfaction of wearing them, hi my opinion the Farmers’ Union should have protested in the strongest possible terms against the. fixing of the price of next season’s wheal. Under the present conditions, it pays much better to grow oats for chaff than it docs to grow wheat, and farmers naturally grow the crops which are likely to give the host returns. K it was absolutely necessary to control the prim l ii would only have been a fair deal to limit the price which the grower has to pay for the many things used in the production of the crop., such as manure, machinery, twine, threshing, and labour otherwise i : is surely a one-sided bargain. Interfering with natural trade cond.il ions tends to curtail production, am! ultimately the public has to ‘foot the bill.’