WHEAT GROWING

Southland Times, Issue 18853, 19 June 1920, Page 5

WHEAT GROWING

FARMERS URGED TO SOW.

CONTROL COMMITTEE’S APPEAL,

Messrs J. Macpherson and J. B, Wathers, members of the Government Wheat Trade Committee, waited as a deputation on the Provincial Conference of the Farmers’ Union yesterday in connection with the “grow more wheat” appeal. Mr Macpherson said that there was little doubt that wheat was going to be of value in the future than it had been for a long time. The New South Wales Government had guaranteed the farmers eight shillings per bushel. The position in Australia with regard to the crop was not as good as it was hoped it would be .It had been estimated that the aggregate of loss in the area under wheat and rye in Europe as compared with 1914 would be 12,000,000 acres. It was also thought that Russia’s production might be lower than had been expected, while America’s winter growth was estimated at .35 per cent, below the usual. In view of all these conditions, it was tuougnt to be the duty of all patriotic farmers to grow us much wheat as possible. It was realised that Southland might be handicapped by climatic conditions, and that it was said that the wheat grown in the province was somewhat unsuitable for milling because of its softness. But Southland farmers could rest assured that a market would lie found for their wheat. There was a proposal on foot that any wheat characterised as soft should be used by the Government for distribution to poultry farmers. The consumption of the fowls in the dominion, outside the farmers’ fowls, amounted to onefifth of the flour consumption. Mr Macpherson expressed the opinion that it might be necessary for the dominion to import wheat. The country would not have enough to carry it through. The Government had guaranteed 7s 3d, 7s 6d, and 7s 9d, according to variety, but he was sure that if it should be necessary to import considerable quantities the country’s farmers would be paid the prices fixed on the world's parity of wheat value. It was rather late to appeal for wheat growing, concluded Mr Macpherson, but spring wheat could still bo sown. Farmers should not take a selfish view. If wheat was not produced it would give a handle to the farmer’s city friends and to the labour element to class him as a profiteer, for a scarcity of wheat meant big prices.

Mr Wathers said that it would be a very serious matter for New Zealand if it had to purchase outside even a portion of its wheat requirements during 1920,21. He referred to the purchase of wheat from Australia, where, if conditions did not improve, it was doubtful if more could be procured. To purchase wheat from Canada meant an enormous expenditure. Furthermore, it literally meant taking the bread out of the mouths of Europe’s starving millions. If the inducements to grow' wheat had not been as good as they might have been in the past, they were now good. With four farmers on the Wheat Committee they need have no fear that their interests would not be watched. This country required at least 6,000,000 bushels of wheat. This year there were only a little over 4,000,000 bushels produced, and the shortage had had to be made up from Australian sources. Where any shortage could be made up next year it was difficult to say. Also, the Government would be placed in an unenviabl position if wheat was scarce and bread dear. Such a state of affairs put a tremendous w'eapon in the hands of the Government's political opponents. Mr Wathers concluded by assuring hie hearers that provision would be made foe the supply of seed wheat to farmers.

Asked what amount the miller was allowed to add to the price of wheat for need purposes, Mr Wathers said it was fivepence.

Mr Miithinwm (Bayswater) said that wheat trowing was not a profitable proposition. The eost of prorjuetion for one crop of MO bushels to the acre wits £lO 10s per acre. There had been mention of patriotism, hut the farmers had given of their best and had given their produce at a loss. Now he and others liad marie up their minds not to grow wheat at under 10s per bushel guaranteeed with an open market. (Loud ap-

plausc). Asked by Mr Couser how i( was proposed to regulate the maximum price of wheat, Mr Macphenson said that it was his own opinion that the farmer should he paid th« price that would have to be paid for imported wheat. He had no doubt that the Committee would rexommend to the Government that the price of next year’s crop bo the open market price. Mr Malcolm (Bayswater) declared thai the Government would pet plenty of wheat if it offered more for it. Then there would be no need for anyone to beg the farmers to grow wheat. If nine shillimrs wp > — <■- ed wheat would be forthcoming. Mr Mai* colm outlined the increases in connection with the costs of growing wheat. It had to be recognised that the Committee’s representatives were not the Government, said Mr Maepherson. Farmers must understand that the minimum price offered this year exceeded by two shillings the minimum price under which they last year agreed to grow wheat. He was certain that the members of the Committee who were farmers were strongly sympathetic lo the agriculturalists and would do all possible to get for them a fair deal. As a farmer he could sympathise with Mr Malcolm's views. A vote of thanks to the deputation waa carried by acclamation, and Messrs Maophenson and Wathers withdrew..