THE FLOUR DUTY.

Taranaki Daily News, Volume L, Issue 61, 28 October 1907, Page 2

THE FLOUR DUTY.

PREVAILING HIGH PRICES. COST OF PRODUCE. The high price of commodities, especially bread, formed the subject of some remarks in the House on Friday during the debate on the Imprest Supply Bill. Mr. Hogg brought the question under the Premier's notice, auu asked what the Government proposed to do about it.

Sir Joseph Ward: You will get the Bill next week, and then you will see what it is. ill', liogg: Well, I'm not sanguine about it myself, .lie considered that in a country so productive as New Zealand there should ue no need for the encouragement of the farmer or pastoralist. Wheat, oats, and grain of every description could be produced in abundance ill this country, and if the farmer was not able to produce it with moderately cheap land, a fine climate, and productive soil, then he could not understand it. What happened immediately after the House, this session had determined to retain the Jlonr duty? The next day lie had a letter from one of the principal millers m the North Island stating he had received a telegram that morning to the effect that wheat had suddenly gone up 2d per bushel. He presumed the members of the House were not representing the grain merchants or farmers especially, or any of the millers. They were there to represent the people, and especially those who were doing their best for the country by increasing the population. But in what way were they encouraging them? They talked a great deal about reducing the cost of the necessaries of life, but, when it came to practical results, what was done? Meat, dairy produce, bread—all these articles were dearer than ever before. Tho price of meat and bread was something unprecedented. ■Mr. T. Mackenzie: Wheat was 7s 9d at one time.

Mr. Hogg: It must have been a very long time ago. Mr. T. Mackenzie: It is years ago. Mr. Hogg: Flour in April of last year was C'J 5s per ton. There is a difference ol ,€4 10s—fifty per- cent. The whole object of the duty is to keep out foreign competition, but I say there's nothing to justify the rise in prices that lias taken place. .1 intend to introduce a Bill again next session for the abolition of the flour duty A .small ring of men are extracting ,UISO,UOU a year out of the pockets of people who can't afford it. jfr. W. Eraser maintained that it was the high prices of products that were making this country prosperous, and these prosperous times must increase the employment for the workers. The argument of the member for Masterton was that the Premier should bring down a Bill prohibiting the farmers getting more than certain prices for their products, in order that the workers could get their food for. nothing. That was impossible.

Sir Joseph Ward said he was persuaded that the Government's proposals would be found of a practical character, not only in the interests of the consumer, but also doing that wliieli wis absolutely essential in regard to an important industry responsible for the employment of a large number of peoph;. It wns easy to say that the flour duty should be removed, but very much more difficult to carry out. At the present time he had more Information on tho (piosllon than any other member of the House, and he was convinced that the j sweeping away of the duty would not depreciate the price of flour in this country 2s fid per ton. Mr. Poland: Try it Tt won't do any. harm. Sir Joseph Ward: Tt would ruin a lot of people without th'' slightest good being done, and T am not prepared' to fee one industry destroyed merely to give way to a cry. Tn onr Bill there's a proposal to meet the fluctuating circumstances.