THE EMBARGO QUESTION.

North Otago Times, Volume CVII, Issue 17748, 12 March 1927, Page 5

THE EMBARGO QUESTION.

MINISTER'S EXPLANATION UNSATISFACTORY. The Governnxenlt's objections to an embargo on flour, as defined by the Minister of Agriculture (Hon. 0. J. Hawken) on Wednesday, were mentioned at a xneeting of the North Otago Agricultural and Pastoral Association yesterday. The objections , are: (1) Such action might i*easonI ably be regarded as being_in conflict with our x-eciprocal agreement with Australia; (2) an embargo would not be in the interests of the consunxer, and (3) in view of the extra quantity of wheat grown this I year it is very doubtful if an exxxi bargo on flour ixnportations would | have the effect hoped'for by the' | New Zealand grower of wheat. Mr J. G. Ruddenklau said he could imdex-stand the first two objections, but as he was unable to comprehend the third he had telegraphed the Minister asking him to explain what he nxeant.

Mr D. Rodgcr said they should snpport what Mr Ruddenklau had done. If they had an extra exnbargo on floixr there would be considerably xxiore wheat grown in the counirv. Mr R. B. Meek approved of Mr Ruddenklau's action. He thought an embargo on flour would have the opposite effect to that stated by tbe Minister. Mr Meek said if there was no embargo and a big quantity of flour was dumped into New Zealand ihe millers Avould be able to say. "We don't want your wheat," and it woxxld he left on the grow-ex-s' hands. Mr Ruddenklau said with axx embargo growers would have confidence to lay out in wheat, The meeting unanimously endorsed Mr ' Ruddenkalu'S action, At this juncutre Mr Ruddenklau handed in th'e following reply which he had just received from the Minister:— "My ooint .was that a total embargo would not xxxaintain the price of wheat if, in fact, there was a full crop. as millers would know they could buy requirements in such qxxantities axxd at such times as suited them/ Under such circumstauces neither dumping duties nor an embargo can assist the farmerif he cannot delay selling. You will have noted that when the dumping. duties were inxposed wheat vvent ' down in • price. In my opinion, it is I not the Australian flour that is comneting with New Zealand wheat, but it is the competition among the farmers themselves in their anxiety io sell their grain. It must be far more profitable for millers to grind New Zealand wheat at present prices than to import Australian flour, In fact they could undersell any imported flour at the prices they are giving for New Zealand wheat, Mr Machin's statement in the fflxristchurch "Press" of yesterday, that it is the dumping of flour that is depressing the market, is in my cpinion fallacious." Members were highly aitiused at Ihe susgestion that it was the competition among farmers themselves that was crcating the present position. • Mr Rodger pointed out, that the Minister said when the dumping dixtv was put on flour the price reccded. That was because the Aixstralian exporters brought down the price. Mr Ruddenklau saxd it was all A*ery well for Mr Ilawken to say that farmers could put their wheat away, bixt lxow many could do it? Mr- Meek said if the Minister thought farixxers were pushing their wheat on to the market, why did not the Governxnent do something under the Board of Trade , regulations? Mr Ruddenklau stated that if Australia could put an embargo on New Zealand potatoes, why could not tixey put an embargo on Australian flour? He thought the Ministex;'s reply was very unsatisfactory and felt that an embargo was required. Mr Rodger thought they should reply stating that they entirely disagreed with the Minister and that they considered an embargo on Australian flour would assist wheat ' growers, 1 A nxotion along those lines was unanimously supported.