THE WHEAT QUESTION.

Timaru Herald, Volume CXXIII, 4 March 1927, Page 6

THE WHEAT QUESTION.

flour importations from AUSTRALIA. vIEWS OF IION. F. J. ROLLESTON, ' ’ ' M.P, ■: • The South Canterbury.- Chamber ; of Commerce is in receipt, of the following letter from the lion. 1C J. Rolleston, M P., for Timaru J In further reference to your letter of the 24th February, »n-cl the resolution of your Chamber in regard to the wheat question/ I have now read Gib report of the discussion on this matter at the general meeting,held last week. The Chamber has- defined its policy under four headings, viz , (1) the encouragement of wheatgrowing as an industry; (2) freedom of all control m relation to> the price for marketing; v '3) a. duty equivalent to that which tho farmer has to pay on implements, goods, etc., ; and (-1) a higher rate of duty on imported flour. 1 propose to deal with these matters in tne same order. fl) The Government lias given substantial evidence of its desire to encourage wheatgrowing in New Zealand by raising the tariff rate on wheat from 9d to 2s per cental, and on flour from £L to £3 per ton. v2) There is. now complete freedom of all official control so far as price- for marketing is concerned. (3) The duties on wneat and flour are higher than the average duties on goods coming to- New Zealand; (nearly 50 per cent of the total imports come ini. free, except for -L per cent primage duty). As to agricultural implements, comparatively few of these are dutiable. (4) The question of increasing the rate of duty on imported flour is one that can bu dealt with only by Parliament, and the matter will, no. doubt, be fully discussed in connection with the revision of the tariif next session. The Government has already taken steps to check unfair importation of flour bv the imposition of dumping duty. This will undoubtedly have the effect of preventing Australian flour heing landed in New Zealand at less than a reasonable price, compared! with Australian domestic quotations. Your resolution suggests that further steps should be taken re prevent the importation of flour. It -has already been pointed out that in view, of our treaty with Australia, as to giving six months notice before increasing duties, an im-. mediate increase of The tariff rate cannot he legally imposed, and an embargo on the importation of flour would have the same effect as a prohibitive duty! Moreover, an embargo would necessarily involve fixation of prices, which would he Contrary to theGovernment's policy, as well as to the declared policy of; your Chamber. Short of an embargo cm flour and price fixation, there is .no apparent means .of increasing tho local price of wheat.