Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

WHEAT DUTIES

REVISION OF SLIDING SCALE WELLINGTON, June 24. Wheatgrowers in the South Island consider that the proposed reduction in the sliding scale duties, as announced some time ago by Mr Forbes, will call upon them to bear more than a fair share of the sacrifice in the economic reconstruction’of New Zealand. This opinion, backed by chambers of commerce and farmers’ organisations in the south, was placed before the Prime Minister by a deputation to-day, when a greater return than 4s 6d a bushel was sought. The deputation, which was about 30 strong, was one of the most representative political expeditions eevry sent to Parliament from the South Island. Mr Mulholland, who introduced the deputation, was followed by Mr James Carr /(Methven), Mr Arthur Shirtcliffe (Timaru), Mr Johnston (Otaio), and Mr Machin (Christchurch ). The speakers declared that the Prime Minister, in aiming at 4s Gd a bushel in the adjustment of the duties, was asking the grain industry to bear a greater sacrifice than any other sec’tion of the community had been asked to make under any proposals so far submitted. No definite guarantee was asked, but several speakers suggested that Mr Forbes could with advantage to the south have shown a little more generosity in the assessment. Several defects in the altered scale were also pointed out to Mr Forbes, w’ho was asked to consider a rectification. Mr Forbes, in reply, said the economic situation of the country was so serious that any inequality of sacrifice would be very undesirable, and it was unreasonable for any one section of the community to expect more than a fair share of consideration in the general sacrifice. The Government was fully alive to the importance of the wheatgrowing industry, and believed it should be maintained upon as profitable a basis as possible. Under the readjustment of the* duties the growers were assured of 4s 6d a bushel, but the question of any additional guarantee must lie in the hands of Parliament itself, where the whole question would shortly be dealt with strictly upon non-party lines. The deputation could rest assured that every effort would be made by the Government to help the grain industry. Members of the deputation reminded Mr Forbes that the whole subject of wheat duties .had been discussed with the Department of Industries and Commerce and the Customs Department some time, ago, and it was understood that - the report had been presented to the Mr Forbes said he had not yet received the report of the conference. An early opportunity is likely to be taken by some southern members to raise the question of wheat duties in Parliament as they may discuss them on both the Imprest Bill and the Address-in-Reply debates. No members of Parliament were present at to-day’s deputation.

Permanent link to this item
Hononga pūmau ki tēnei tūemi

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/OW19310630.2.66

Bibliographic details
Ngā taipitopito pukapuka

Otago Witness, Issue 4033, 30 June 1931, Page 18

Word count
Tapeke kupu
462

WHEAT DUTIES Otago Witness, Issue 4033, 30 June 1931, Page 18

WHEAT DUTIES Otago Witness, Issue 4033, 30 June 1931, Page 18

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert