KOYAL COMMISSION ON AGBICULTUKE. 



89 Stfttmbtr, 1919.] 



MR. JAMES DMULMM. 



[Continued. 



11.470. But I want to know what \ your view. 

 It it your view that the Corn Production Act should 

 be repealed or not!* I am not hero to say whether 

 the Corn Production Act should bo or should not 

 be repealed. 



11.471. I do not want to be rude to anybody 

 coming here, because you arc voluntarily giving your 

 evidence; but may I ask what service it is to us for 

 you to come and speak on behalf of these 86,000 

 fanner*? It is for you to judge. 



11.472. I have formed my opinion alreadyP 1 

 cannot project myself into your mind. 



11.473. No; but although those questions may seem 

 stupid to you they do not to me. You surely do not 

 mean on behalf of the farmers that you want to go 

 back? I simply mean that this has been put before 

 the Council of the Farmers' Union, who are repre- 

 sentative of the whole, and it has been endorsed by 

 them. 



11.474. As you know their mind, do you mind telling 

 me as a matter of fact do they advocate the nj>. al 

 of the Corn Production Act so 'far as wages are con- 

 cerned or not? Is it not possible that there might 

 be amendments made in that with regard to any 

 future policy? I am not going to argue on policy 

 at all. I have told you already I am not arguing 

 on policy. Whenever policy comes up you will find 

 it perhaps something different to what is embodied 

 in the Corn Production Act if we have a chance of 

 putting it before you. There I must leave the ques 

 tion. It is touching on policy again. 



11.475. If you are the only witness we are going to 

 have on behalf of the "Farmers' Union, I must press 

 these things, because we want information? I am 

 sorry I am such a dense witness. 



11.476. Is it, or is it not, the view of the farmers 

 that the Corn Production Act should be repealed, so 

 far as it fixes the minimum wage, and that the wage 

 question as between the employers and the employed 

 should be left either to collective or individual 

 bargaining? At this stage of the proceedings I am 

 not in a position to state. 



11.477. Again you say you cannot tell us any- 

 thing? I am not in a position to state. 



11.478. I suggest to you that unless it is, it is 

 quite impossible, at the present moment, to go back 

 from the minimum wage. Whether it has been 

 rightly administered or not is a different matter. 

 Do you accept that? I accept that. 



11.479. Then the two things are inconsistent, you 

 see. Your acceptance of that proposition is incon- 

 sistent with this statement at the end of paragraph 

 11? Would you allow me to remind you that the 

 Corn Production Act is obsolete with regard to prices? 



11.480. We are aware of that at the present 

 moment; but we are dealing with next year? And 

 you are put in this position, I take it, of recom- 

 mending prices for next year? 



11.481. Assume that is one of the things? There- 

 fore, you are taking the place of the Corn ^Production 

 Act, to some extent, in this Commission sitting here. 

 That is my point all along, and I have tried to get 

 that home. 



11.482. Assume all that: you do not help us. You 

 do not tfll us what the price should be? I have 

 already said. 



11.483. I cannot get on any further, and I will 

 leave it thero. Assuming you have the present mini- 

 mum wngp, are the farmers able to pay those present 

 rates of minimum wages with the present guarantees? 

 That is for you to decide again, I take it. 



11.484. On what evidence, if we do not get the 

 farmers' evidence? You are having some farmers' 

 evidence, are not you? 



11,486. Yes; but the National Farmers' Union 

 evidence is what we want to get? We are putting 

 forward f-ortain witness**. 



11,486. YM; yourself and Mr. Wyllie? I think 

 yon will find more. 



11. 4*7. Of rourno. if we nro going to have more who 

 will answer the (|iii-tiotm, I will not pursue this. 

 Am I to take it that you are not prepared to say, 

 although you represent the Farmers' T'nicm. whether 

 the farmers aro in :i [xwition to pay the wages? I 

 have already answered that qunttmn. 



11,486. Would you mind answering it again? No, 

 I shall not repeat my answer. 



At the request of the Chairman, the Shorthand 

 Writer read the question and answer: " 1 cannot 

 get on any further, and I will leave it th> 

 " Assuming you have the present minimum 

 " wages, are the farmers able to pay those 

 " present rates of minimum wages with the 

 ' present guarantees? That is for you to decide 

 "again 1 take it." 



11.489. Is that the only answer you can give? 

 That is the only an-m r 1 am prepared to give. 



11.490. If that is so, it is no good asking you 

 whi-tlier you can make any suggestions as to what 

 ought to be done to enable the farmers to pay those 

 wages? You see you have the Wages Boards, and 

 they have a certain number of representatives. 

 What they agree upon, that we should pay. 



11.491. Yes, I am aware of that- and the question 

 wo have to consider is the making of a balance 

 between the wages and the costs and expenses of the 

 farmers? I could answer your question more per- 

 fectly if you would tell me what sort of season I am 

 going to have next year if you would tell me whether 

 I will get a two quarter crop or a four quarter 

 ^rop. 



11.492. That is one of the difficulties in the farming 

 business, and I agree with you, that ado's to the 

 difficulty ; but you have to take an average crop, and 

 the most likely persons I thought who would be able 

 to give information were persona engaged in the in- 

 dustry and had the industry in their hands? Of 

 course you have a free market to-day, you must 

 remember, in two commodities; that is in oats and in 

 barley. You have certainly a fixed price for wheat. 

 It is said it is a free market, but we find it is not a 

 free market. I do not know whether you mean by the 

 present prices that there shall be a free market in 

 all commodities next year? That has been perplexing 

 mo all the time. What fixed prices can you point mo 

 to with regard to oats and barl< 



11.493. The position is this, to make it as plain as 

 I can; that at present, as you have pointed out, 

 the controlled prices of cereals, such as they are, are 

 fixed under the Defence of the Realm Act. Next 

 year, if nothing is done, the prices will be fixed under 

 the Corn Production Act, and the price for wheat 

 is 45s. and for oats 24s. a quarter? Yes, that is 

 putting it quite clearly now. That would be totally 

 inadequate. 



11.494. Now I have got something from you at any 

 rato. Do the farmers consider that the prices, as fixed 

 by the Corn Production Act, are t.itajlv inadequate, 

 having regard to the present price of iereal.s and the 

 present price of fertilisers, feeding stuffs, machinery, 

 and the other expenses of a farmer? The prices 

 fixed by the Corn Production Act would be totally 

 inadequate; but as I pointed out, the farmers are 

 relying upon the statement of the Prime Minister, 

 that those prices are not to be less than they are 

 at present. 



11.495. Then my question comes to this, which you 

 seem to shy at: Are the present prices as fix'isl. 

 which the Prime Minister has promised shall not be 

 less next year, sufficient to enable the farmers 

 to pay the wages and the present outgoings for 

 fertilisers, feeding stuffs, and other outgoings, and 

 to make a profit in their business? I would again like 

 to point out to you that we have no present prices 

 fixed for oats and barley, except under the Corn 

 Production Act. If you are going back to that, that 

 is totally inadequate. 



11.496. But there is a minimum price fixed? And 

 a free market given to it. 



11.497. So that you have a further benefit at 

 present, that you have the minimum price fixed under 



the Defence of the Realm Act ? Taking it on the 



whole, you are taking a fixed price at S8s. for barley. 

 75s. for wheat, and about 60s. for oats. I would say 

 thnt those prices were not adequate at the present 

 moment. The present prices we are milking d<. not 

 leave agriculture in n totally iinreniunerative position. 



11.498. You mean because of the large price of 

 barley and oats? Yes; that is exactly what I wanted 

 to bring out. 



