DEARER BREAD.

Taranaki Daily News, 8 March 1920, Page 4

DEARER BREAD.

The latest development of the coat of living problem has the same main characteristic as its predecessors—an increase. The Government, in order to induce farmers to grow wheat, fixed the selling price at an advance over that of last year. As a consequence, flour becomes dearer, and the paternal Government has sanctioned a rise of £1 10s for that commodity, making the market price £l6 per ton f.o.b. Lyttelton, Timara and Oamaru, transportation charges having to he added at other places. Higher priced flour means dearer bread, the increase sanctioned by the Government being at ;he rate of one half-penny per two-pound loaf, the selling price of which (over the counter) will now be Sli, and (delivered) sixpence'. The Canterbury master bakers decided not to accept the new price for bread, and it is stated they do not intend to make bread at the price fixed. At Wellington it was decided by the bakeira that to make bread at the new price .would mean a loss which they could not bear; therefore they w"-'Vf have to close down, but the. Premier' hopes such a drastic step will not he taken. The effect of the new fixed price on New Plymouth bakers has been tat forth in an interview with Mr.

May by a News representative, in which the position was fully disclosed, the local bakers deciding to support the action of their Wellington confreres. It may, therefore, be expected that the matter will be brought before the Premier, and that every endeavor will be made to have the selling price of bread advanced by another half-penny per wo-pound loaf. Mr. May, it will be noted, stressed the fact that whereas the selling price of flour was £l6 10s per ton in the] south, it would cost £l7 10s 2d landed at the premises of the New Plymouth bakers, and that the present increase in price was practically mortgaged to the men, He also drew attention to the subsidy to the millers falling on the public, as it was paid out of the Consolidated Fund, thereby adding to the cost of bread. To say the least, the Government's method of solving the cost of living is peculiar. The farmers are given a profitable price for wheat, tho millers are subsidised, ait the expense of the public, to keep down the cost of flour, and the bakers are forced into the uncomfortable position of being Scylla and Charybdis. Why this hard working section of the community should be tied down and prevented from earning a just return for their capital, skill and labor ia a mystery. Butchers aTe allowed to charge what they please and supply that class of meat which gives them the largest profit. There is no control over those engaged in the hardware, drapery, furniture, boot and other trades in which profiteering is rampant, and tobacconists are allowed to sell at what prices they please. It would seem as if the Government was bent on straining at a gnat and swallowing a camel. Baking is a strenuous and by no means healthy occupation, and those who engage in this very essential business are clearly entitled to a square deal. At the same time the Government is in an awkward fix, for it has increased instead of decreased the cost of living, so tha,t it looks as if the bakers wore to be made a scape goat for the sins of the Government. If the matter were not so serious, as it unquestionably is, it would be ludicrous. Apparently there is one way in which the public can meet these soaring prices of the necessaries of life, and that is by stringent economy av.d the prevention of waste. There is ample scope for Government action in repressing profiteering, especially in the direction of the leather trade, without imposing on the public the risk of being breadless. The Government cannot force bakers to carry on any more than they can force farmers to grow wheat. Manifestly bakers wouU prefer closing down to working at a loss, 'hut the life of any Government would not be worth a day's purchase it" the people arc deprived of their dailv bread,