MO 



KOVAI. COMMISSION ,,s AtlKICrriTUK. 



i-r- 



Sn: llKMJV III I K ' ]: 



[('Mtluilfll. 



606. I thought you would be the person beet able 

 to give them to UK-. 1 want these figi. 



I will IM- very g'ad t<i ch.x-k them and have a .- 

 ment prepared Tor you. Inn I was not ready fur it. 



607. I suggest, taking into in muni bringing up the 

 hours to what tho u.-n before tin- war and charging 

 the extra hours now at the overtime rate, the wage* 

 have increased 200 per rent. You would agree with 

 me that the isi ni niachinoiv ami the iiiipleine>ils 

 used by a farmer. Imve im-rca-ed at least 250 pel 

 wince just before the war- No. As n matter of fact 

 I am handing in to the Commiiaion a fairly elaborate 

 fitatement brought up to date from the Id-port nf the 

 Farming Costs Committee. 



608. I prefer to-day's figures to those figures? It 

 ia to-day's figures I have got. I have brought thc-e 

 figures up to May this year. 



009. There lias been a good deal of change since 

 M.i\. I believe, about machinery; but I am not 

 giving evidence:'- I should have thought that i- 

 doubtful ; but I cannot say definitely. 



610. Do 3-011 think I am overstating it when I *a. 

 it has increased 250 per cent. F Tes, I think so. 



611. I put it to you it is more than that, in many 

 OM ll 



612. Chairman: Will you put in the information, 

 if you have it? Yes, I will put in what information 

 we have. 



613. Mr. i 'until i/ : Should I be right in saying that 

 feeding stuffs have increased at least 200 per cent.? 

 Yes. I should think that that would be so. 



614. Speaking generally, then, everything that a 

 farmer has to buy has increased, I put it, from 250 

 per cent.. and I go further even to 300 per cent.? 

 If I may say eo, I think you are a little overstating 

 the figures ; but something in that direction. 



615. The only one you suggested I was overstating 

 was machinery? 



Mr. Dallai : And wages. 



Mr. CautJry: No, he did not suggest that. 



616. Let us take the selling price. Is every item 

 that a farmer has to sell, except eggs, controlled in 

 price? Tes. I think that is so. 



617. If a farmer had the play of the market, he 

 would be getting very considerably larger sums for 

 everything he grows on his farm, except eggs? Yes, 

 substantially, that is so. 



618. Therefore, instead of the farmer being sub- 

 sidised, the farmer is subsidising the Government? 

 I do not know about the Government. 



619. The country? Yes. 



620. The Government stands for the country. Have 

 you got, or could you get, a statement of the present 

 controlled prices of all agricultural produce? Yes. 



621. And we could have that up to date, I mean? 

 Certainly ; only you would get it more directly from 

 the Ministry of Food, I think. 



622. Should I be right in saying that those prices 

 are only about 160 to 180 per cent, up, on the average? 

 A you know, it is extremely difficult to make an 

 average. 



623. It is more difficult for me, a layman and not 

 an expert. If you have not it in your mind, I would 

 rather have the accurate figures handed in some time 

 else? As I say, in this statement which I have 

 brought to date, which gives the average prices of the 

 main farm products, I have given th figures com- 

 paring .June. 1913, to May, 1!)14, that is. to say, the 



.Itii I tli" year just before the war. with th<> year 



ending May 31st, 1919. 



624. Does that show tho increase? It shows the 

 price* year by year and the percentage increase, 

 -howing the pre-war as 100. 



626. Does that show the increase in the price of 

 beef, fat cattle, from what it was before the war, and 

 tin- :iNt May this year:' V a are 12-i: 



vert 



626. What was the percentage im-reiise in tin- price 

 of beef" -IIS per Tit. I have thn index tiiimlier 



637. That is a fanciful figure. 1 am not so 

 partial to expert* myself; I like practice. Could you 

 ii-ll me- the selling price of l>eef Ix-foro the war, the 

 clling price for the year ending .'list May lout :- ! 

 suggest it is not MS large an increase as that 

 I |:l |* 



628. No. nothing like n I have not the actual 

 figure here. 



Anvway. it is no good my taking each one in 

 do tail, because I ha\e not them worked out and I 

 was relying on you ; hut you think Sir William 

 Beveridgo will give it to me:- No; if you want the 

 increase of prices since In-fore the war, of course we 

 can give them t<> you. I am saying what you can 

 get from the, Food Controller is I lie prices they have 

 fixed as maximum prices. 



il.'l i. It I am light that c\eryiliing the I. inner ha 

 to buy has increased nom '2(HI to INKi per cent., and 

 that everything he has to sell has only increased 

 from 100 to 150 per cent. I do not know quite, hut 

 the average is much belo.w 150 I should say -does not 

 that show that his industry must be much less profit- 

 able than it was? No, I do not think it do. 

 itself. It may be true, but it does not show it. 



631. Would you explain what you mean by that 

 answer? It depends on the quantity he buys and tin- 

 quantity he sells; and, if I may say so, that is one 

 of the traps of peroenta. 



032. I am not dealing with any special farmer; but 

 does not the normal farmer 'buy and sell about the 

 same quantity each year, allowing for a bad year 

 and a good year? Have you farmed yourself ever? 

 No. 



633. I put it to you, if you have knowledge from 

 other people who have farms, are not the average 

 amount the farmer sells each year and the amount he 

 buys practically very much the same? I should think 

 that is so; but, with submission, I do not think it hat 

 is quite relevant. 



634. Will you explain what you mean by your last 

 answer? I mean that on a given acre of land a man 

 will get, wo will say, four quarters of wheat. A rise 

 in the price of that, whatever yon may put it at 150 

 per cent. has no necessary relation as regards profit 

 from it to a rise in the price, we will say, of the 

 artificial manure that he puts on that acre. 



635. Just think. Does not the whole cost of grow- 

 ing wheat consist of labour, the use of machinery, and 

 the use of his foodstuffs to make manure, and the use 

 of artificial manures to fertilise the land ; and, except 

 for rent, have not I included every item that a farmer 

 has to spend, and is not the cost of wheat made up 

 of those very items, and the only profit he gets the 

 difference between the cost ot boose items and the 

 price he realises in the market? That is perfectly 

 true. 



636. Surely you must modify your answer, when 

 you said that what a farmer buys and what he sells 

 has nothing to do with the raite of profit he makes P I 

 did not say that at all. What I said was that to 

 make a comparison is not to take a percentage in- 

 crease on particular items; but you want to have the 

 actual amount spent on each of the itema and n 



for the different items, and then you will get tlir- 

 balancc. 



637. Of course I agree with you that you want to 

 j-.et the exact amounts. To go back to where I was. 

 1 suggest to you that these enormous increases on 

 \\hat the farmer has to pay, compared with the 

 relatively less increase of what he has to veil, has 

 made his (xmition worse in the future than it was 

 liefore the war:- That is an im]wvsMhlo question; I 

 cannot tell you. Of course, if you were- right ii 



ing that at the present level of prices it is impossible 

 to make a profit on farming, then it follows that if 

 the present level of prices both ways continues (re- 

 name, it will .still he impossible to make a profit on 

 farming. 



I do suggest it is iin and it is only 



rendered p" ihle liy the litices fixed Milder the De- 

 fence of the Hcalm Act. Would you ngrco with that'- 

 V \ I aid. the prices fixed under the I), i 



