BREAD PRICES

Sun (Auckland), Volume III, Issue 772, 19 September 1929, Page 11

BREAD PRICES

WHEAT DUTIES BLAMED CONFLICTING EVIDENCE Press Association WELLINGTON, Wednesday. The Select Committee set up to inquire into the necessity for the present sliding scale of duties on wheat continued its hearing of evidence yesterday. Mr. James Mitchell, journalist of Oamaru, said he did not represent any particular interest associated with the matter under consideration. He believed the best and safest method of affording protection to the wheat industry was by a sliding scale of duties upon wheat and Hour. Its outstanding merits were tnat it ensured for the producer a constant price for his wheat, on a basis giving him a reasonable return, and guarded the bread buyer against exploitation In the event of a shortage of supply. Witness said he was convinced that taking a broad and comprehensive view of the whole subject the soundest, safest and the best economic policy for New Zealand to pursue was to render the country independent of outside supplies of foodstuffs. To that end it was absolutely essential that tariff protection would be given to the wheat-growing industry. Mr. P. T. Colbeck, of Auckland, said he was fundamentally opposed to all protective taxes and subsidies, but he was afraid that the only way of overcoming the present difficulty would be to give a subsidy to the farmers. He was in favour of a subsidy of Is a bushel on all wheat produced. Mr. C. L. Carr, a member of the committee: But how would the Consolidated Fund be reimbursed for that expenditure? Mr. Colbeck: Out of the ordinary taxation.

Replying to the chairman witness said he did not suggest that the price of wheat was too high, but the price of bread to the consumer was too high. Mr. S. H. Judd, representing the pig industry, said Smithfield advices indicated that pig carcases sent Home were not up to standard owing to the lack of hard food. The high cost of grain and grain offal was due to the protective duties, and the ordinary farmers consequently refused to use grain and grain offal in sufficient quantities. The number of pigs in New Zealand was decreasing instead of increasing, and this year they were down 30,000. The committee then adjourned until today. When the inquiry resumed this morning, Mr. W. D. Hunt, representing the Unemployment Committee, submitted a paper prepared for the committee recommending the removal of all duties on stock foods, including wheat and wheat offal, but not on wheat for human consumption. This was to enable New Zealand to compete in the Home market with pig and poultry products, which he was satisfied was possible under the suggested conditions. He strongly opposed the subsidy to millers. The subsidy had to be borne by somebody, and would mean an extra land or income tax. Mr. J. H. Barber, representing the master bakers, quoted prices of flour and bread in Australia and New Zealand. He said that on the Australian basis, bread here would be 6Jd and 7d a 21b load. It was certain there could not be a reduction In the price of bread without a reduction in the price of wheat and flour. Mr. F. H. Hawker, of Christchurch, a baker, said his firm was losing 6s 4d a sack in making heavy bread. This was made up on fancy lines. Mr. A. House, a baker, gave the following figures of the cost of producing a 21b loaf:—Wages, .6d; fuel, .13d; upkeep of plant, .Id; salt and other ingredients, ,31d; flour, 3.2 d; administration, .3d: interest, .08(1; delivery and wages, .57d; other delivery costs, .25d; total, 5Jd. Mr. D. W. A. Kellow, of Wellington, baker, said he had worked out the cost of delivered bread at 5.73 d. The inquiry was adjourned till next Tuesday.