MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 



77 



23 September, 1919.] 



MK. JAMES DONALDSON. 



[Continued. 



830 million pounds that is what it has been computed 

 at at the least. It is staggering almost. 



11.316. Do you think that a guarantee would alter 

 the minds of farmers in that respect? I should 

 like to know what the guarantee is before I give an 

 opinion on that. 



11.317. I just wanted to ask you one or two points 

 about that. What duration of guarantee do you 

 think would be necessary in order to remove that 

 anxiety on the part of farmers? Taking a long view 

 or a snort view? 



11.318. That is what I wanted to ask you. Do you 

 think that a long view is necessary or a short view 

 or a combination of both? I think the long view is 

 necessary, but if you did not feel justified in going 

 in for the long view I regard 8 to 10 years as the 

 short view. 



11.319. I suppose you realise the difficulty of fore- 

 casting what prive conditions may be over a period like 

 that ? Undoubtedly. 



11.320. Have you anything to say on that subject? 

 --No you are leading on to policy now. 



11.321. You would be prepared at a later stage to 

 say something about that? Quite. 



11.322. Would you attach any value to a still shorter 

 view as a temporary and emergency measure to a 

 statement with regard to a single year or to two 

 years, for example? We have had these short tem- 

 jK>i-ary measures already and the result is, as I said, 

 ili.H we are going back very gradually to pre-war 

 conditions as regards 'grass and other things. It is 

 not for me to say, but my own personal opinion is 

 that if you are going to benefit agriculture at the 



nt moment the sooner you get a long policy 

 rather than a short one the better. The short policy 

 has been tried and in my opinion it has been found 

 wanting. 



11.323. You think that it is of comparatively little 

 value? I think it is of comparatively little value 

 at the present moment. 



1 1 .324. Regarding 8 or 9 years as the short view, 

 what would you regard as the long view? A per- 

 manent policy. 



11,325. I do not want to take you on to subjects 

 that you do not want to discuss just now, but it is 

 quite evident that a |>ermanent policy could not be 

 a policy with fixed figures of any kind- it would need 

 to put forward figures based upon some principle? 

 Yes, I quite follow. Of course we may say nothing on 

 this earth is permanent. 



11.320. Quite so. and not even farming? I think 

 you have gras|x*d my meaning. By permanent I mean 

 something extending over a longer period than from 

 8 to 10 years. 



11.327. Something not fixing definite figures, but 

 fixing the principle upon which prices should from 

 time to time be based? Exactly. 



11.328. Do you not think even with regard to what 

 you call the short period the 8 or 9 years' period 

 that something of that sort would probably be more 

 satisfactory if it could be arrived at? I would not 

 go so far as to say it would be much more satisfactory 

 than a one or two years basis. 



11.329. I mean a basis of principle would be much 

 better than an attempt to lay down figures 8 to 10 

 years in advance? I am afraid that perhaps your 

 idea of what our policy may be and our ideas may 

 not quite coincide. You are touching on policy here 

 and I would rather reserve the question of policy 

 until later on. 



11.330. Yes,- but one question we have to deal with 

 is the question of the present emergency, and that 

 must be dealt with quickly? I take it that this 

 Commission is sitting here to-day for the purpose of 

 advising the Government in their Interim Report 

 with regard to next year's prices. 



11.331. Upon that assumption what would you say? 

 - As to next year's prices? 



11.332. Yes? I think I must leave it to you gentle- 

 men to judge of that after having heard all the 



11.333. Anything you have to say regarding any 

 long period would be really infringing on the general 

 question of policy, and, therefore, you would rather 

 wt deal with that.' now? That is so. 



11.334. Mr. Kea : In answer to one of Dr. Douglas' 

 questions you said that the agricultural industry had 

 lost a very large sum of money during the 30 years 

 before the war? Yes. 



11.335. Do you think that those losses have boon 

 made good during the war? Certainly not. 



11.336. Your view is that the profits which have 

 accrued during the last five years have not counter- 

 balanced the losses during the previous period of de- 

 pression? That is a difficult question, but I can give 

 you my own experience. Were I to-day in a position 

 to realise my crops and my stock and my implements 

 at the inflated prices prevailing owing to the war i 

 should certainly go out of my farm very much better 

 than I would have done 4 or o years ago to a large ex- 

 tent, but 1 am not thinking of doing that, and the 

 great majority of the farmers of England are still 

 thinking of keeping on, and, therefore, I regard that 

 inflated value as only being a pro tern, value, and 

 when prices drop the value of my implements and my 

 stock will drop likewise. I, therefore, look upon these 

 inflated values as being money that is simply loaned 

 to me for the time being. That is my view of the 

 practical position. 



11.337. That is really what I was putting to you 

 whether you are not carrying over what are simply 

 paper profits to a large extent ? Exactly. 



11.338. Do you think that very much of the cash 

 profits of the last 3 or 4 years have been due to 

 deterioration of the land more than was the case 

 in pre-war times? To a great extent. The Govern- 

 ment asked us to grow every possible acre of cereals 

 and other products that we possibly could do and we 

 did so, but we know we did it at the expense of the 

 land and it is no use trying to disguise the fact that 

 our land to-day is not in as good a condition from 

 the ordinary farming point of view as it was prior 

 to the war. 



11.339. Of course, during the war you had not the 

 labour with which to do it? No, we had not the 

 lalxnir and what we did have was unskilled. 



11.340. Do you think for the future safety of the 

 country that arable cultivation should be kept up ? 

 I do. I go so far as to say that; in my own opinion, 

 it is necessary from the point of view of the safety 

 of the country as well as from the point of view of 

 a stronger and healthier population, as I have put 

 down here in my statement. 



11.341. It is really a national matter, more than a 

 farmer's matter? Yes, political rather than indus- 

 trial, as I put it here. 



11.342. So that, if the guarantee were given, do you 

 consider that it would be for the benefit of the farmer 

 or for the benefit of the nation? If you are going 

 to take agriculture along with you, it is certainly 

 going to be for the benefit of the farmer, tho labourer 

 and the nation; I would include all three. 



11.343. In your evidence-in-chief you point out that 

 the farmer has an alternative agricultural policy 

 that he can produce less and employ less labour and 

 still make a profit for himself? Yes. That, I point 

 out also, is not for the benefit of the nation, in my 

 opinion. 



11.344. That is simply put forward as an alterna- 

 tive:' -Simply as an alternative, but it is an alterna- 

 tive that is not going to be for the benefit of the 

 nation, according to my way of thinking. 



11.345. You think the farmer would only do that 

 if he was forced to do it? Exactly. 



11.346. But to enable him to carry on the cereal 

 cultivation on a scale not less than the present, you 

 think a guarantee of some sort is necessary?- I think 

 that is undoubted, and to enable us to pay the wages 

 that we wish to pay and feel that we ought to pay. 

 I never want that to be forgotten. 



11.347. Without a guarantee do you consider that 

 the Corn Production Act ought to- be done away 

 with altogether that all control on both sides should 

 disappear? Will you repeat the question? 



11.348. Suppose it were decided that no guarantee 

 should be given, do you think that all the other pro- 

 visions of the Corn Production Act ought also to be 

 done away with that is, the Wages Board and no 

 on P Yes, but that is policy again, I am afraid, and 

 I have rather pronounced views with regard to that, 



