SHEEP FARMING COSTS

Wairarapa Times-Age, 27 July 1939, Page 3

SHEEP FARMING COSTS

IMPORTANCE OF WAGES EXAGGERATED VIEWS OF THE MEMBER FOR MASTERTON. FIGURES LAID BEFORE PARLIAMENT. Touching on the problems of sheep farming industry, when he spoke in the Address-in-Reply Debate in the House of Representatives, the member for Masterton, Mr J. Robertson. . said in part:—“lf we examine the position, we find several points in relation to costs that are never mentioned by the other side. I have with me the balance sheets of a number of sheep farmers, and I find some of the items rather interesting. The honourable member for Motueka was telling us his experience in shearing. I have a balance sheet relating to a small sheep farm of 931 acres, and the whole cost of shearing, dipping and crutching was £53 The commission paid to the stock and station agents, however, was £4O. I have never heard the Farmers’ Union or honourable members on the other side suggest that we should engage in a drive to reduce those commission costs. I have heard them engage in a drive to reduce wages. When they speak of costs we find that to them costs and wages are synonymous terms. For instance, the President of the Farmers’ Union quotes the Prime Minister as having told him that he would never agree to any reduction in costs. As far as I am awaie, and I have read all the public utterances of the Prime Minister, the right honourable gentleman has never said that he was against reducing costs. He did say that he was against reducing wages. As I have just remarked, wages and costs are evidently synonymous terms in the mind of the President of the Farmers’ Union, and. unlike the honourable member for Christchurch North, the President of the Farmers’ Union cannot see any way of reducing costs without reducing wages. Another balance-sheet in my hand shows that the cost of shearing, dipping and crutching was £l7 10s, and that commissions were £24. Another shows that shearing, dipping and crutching cost £2O 4s 9d, and commissions were £22 13s lOd. A balance sheet relating to a farm of 3,100 acres shows that shearing, dipping and crutching cost £lO6, and that commissions were £65 7s 4d. Still another balance sheet relating to a farm of 1,184 acres, shows that shearing, dipping and crutching. cost £36, and commissions amounted to £3l Ils 3d.” Colonel Hargest: “That farmer must have sold about £l2OO worth of stock.

Mr Robertson: “I am only giving items from the certified balance sheets of several farmers, and ’am not prepared to enter upon a wrangle about how the figures are arrived at.” To another inter jector, who said it must be remembered that farmers cannot get advances from the State Advances Corporation, Mr Robertson replied: —“Not at present, because there is no system of advancing on stock, and there never has been one. If the honourable member wishes to assist this Government in working out a system which would abolish the stock and station agents I think the Government would be prepared to listen attentively. In the meantime, unfortunately, the evil continues, and Opposition members, instead of attacking that system, say nothing about it but concentrate on attacking wages. They do not attack the parasites who are battening on the production of the farmers and workers alike. FREEZING CHARGES. “The President of the Farmers’ Union the other day, in speaking about freezing charges, said the wages cost of preparing a 36-pound lamb to f.o.b. was about 2s 3d, and for a 48pound ewe, 3s. I represent a farming district and I wanted to ascertain for myself just what these costs were in order to see whether they could reasonably be reduced. I therefore investigated the matter for myself and I found that the amounts stated were incorrect. I found that the charges— I can give them item by item if desired —including delivery, at the factory and right through to the slaughterhouse, freezing chamber and loading on to trucks, works out at 12.02 d for a 36-pound lamb, not 2s 3d, and that for a sheep it amounted to 13.9 d, and not 3s. The weight of the. animals varies, of course, but that would be the average cost on the actual weights received at the works. Again, I say, the farmer will not have his problems solved by exaggerating the position.”