FRIDAY, AUGUST 10, 1917. WHY BREAD IS DEAR.

Taihape Daily Times, Issue 220, 10 August 1917, Page 4

FRIDAY, AUGUST 10, 1917. WHY BREAD IS DEAR.

Again pointed attention has been drawn to what is considered a higt price for bread. We are not referring to Taihape, but to the question generally. Members of the B'oard of Trade have unofficially said that we have nothing to complain of here,they meant, of course, that with flour at the price bakers could not make a living at anything below the present ruling figure. Members of Parliament are, however, not satisfied; they apparently feel that someone or something is in operation to exploit the people in their daily bread, and Ministers are being questioned and statements are being made in the House which, are tending to clear the bread and flour atmosphere. Very much too great concern is shown by the authorities for the welfare of millers, but right through the controversy millers have been a stumbling block. We could not, and cannot, under stand why the Government will go on robbing the people to fatten unnecessary millers. If New Zealand cannot grow wheat sufficient to feed her people, there can be no need of mills to grind it. What can the masses of the people think of a Government that goes on importing wheat purely for the purpose of keeping mills going, which have proved little more than suckers of the blood of the poor? The masses are taxed to buy wheat for mills, and they are recompensed by being charged preposterous prices for their flour. The Hon. D. Buddo told the Government there was something wrong somewhere. At Home with bread at ninepence the Government was giving a subsidy to keep down the price, while in New Zealand the farmer was getting fivepence a loaf for finding land, seed, and labour, paying for threshing and cartages, and yet it was being sold at a shilling. It is apparent there is a big “ rake-off ” somewhere, and it cannot very well be anywhere else but in the mills. On the loaf that costs fivepence to grow’- the people are charged sevenpence for * sj&jk , -v.-v,.,;'

milling and making, and we are perfectly satisfied that it is the hourmiller and not the breadmaker that is doing the exploiting, and yet the Government will go on using the taxpayers’ money to buy wheat in foreign lands to enable these positively dishonest levies to be made, when they might buy the flour —good flour —and give the people a loaf at a fair price. The most amazing thing is that the Government is not paying a shilling for its own four-pound loaf, for the Defence Minister has stated that the cost of the four-pound loaf at Trentham Camp is only sevenpence farthing. Is there not corruption somewhere when sixpence farthing is the cost to the Government and the people are made to pay a shilling; is this not to enable exploiting millers to make huge fortunes ? The State pays sixpence and coldbloodedly looks on while the widows and dependents of slain soldiers are forced to pay a shilling or starve. The Prime Minister was asked in the House whether he was aware that South Island mills might have to close down by reason of competition with imported flour. If the country cannot grow wheat and millers cannot import wheat themselyes wdiy should the taxpayer do it for them ? Is the whole popluation—rich and poor—to go on importing wheat for these millers at a loss and then be charged a positively dishonest price for bread ? There is onPy a handful of millers in the country, what matters if their mills close down tilt the country can grow wheat to set them going. Flour can be imported to produce a loaf at eightpence, and yet taxpayers’ money is used to import wheat for millers so that they can keep the loaf at a shilling. Mr. Massey said he knew all about it, he had a plentiful supply of letters and telegrams from the millers, and a Cabinet meeting would consider them to-morrow or Monday. The position was a difficult one that would have to he faced, but he goes on to show very clearly that there is no difficulty about getting flour for a cheap loaf. He meant, of course, it was difficult for the Government to go on importing wheat at a loss to the taxpayers just to keep the mills going, so that exploitation prices might continue. He said that across the Tasman Sea there were six million tons of wheat in store, with another harvest coming on. This wheat could not be sent to England owing to shipping shortage. Australians were anxious to sell the wheat or the flour wherever they could, and they found a market for the flour in New Zealand because it could be sold, and was being sold, at a low price. Mr Massey said it was difficult to object to flour being sold at a low price, but owing to these ■low prices competition with Southern mills was very severe. But why the apologetic tone and phrasing ? Taxpayers owe nothing to millers, whom they have bolstered up long enough to make of them a coterie of exploiters. We now know that flour is available at a price that should bring bread down to eightpence the fourpound loaf, and we do not believe that people generally, and particularly the large organisations representing the labouring people will stand •reedlessly by should the Government take any course to keep active the milling exploiters and maintain bread prices at the present high leevl, despite the fact that there are millions of tons of cheap flour available. If this cheap flour is coming in such huge quantities as to perturb Southern millers, who is getting the profit between it and the shilling loaf ?