RELATED TOPICS 265 
much more intermittent. It would appear, then, that 
our price would not fall to any great extent, and 
production would therefore be continued, at least at 
its present level, largely because of the interdependence 
of agricultural and pastoral farming. 
(d) General Free Trade would benefit the Farmer.— 
The New Zealand farmer has everything to gain by a 
general abolition of protection in the Dominion. His 
industry is the least protected of all, manufactures 
receiving protection at least to double the amount. 
While Australia retains her protective duties on wheat 
and flour (and these are about 25 per cent.), it is said 
that New Zealand must also retain her duties. But 
London is the chief market for New Zealand wheat, and 
in any case Australia herself is an exporting country. 
Then, again, even if the abolition of the import duty 
on flour caused the milling industry in New Zealand to 
decline, (not that it would), this might be a boon to the 
country. Supplies of flour could be obtained from Aus- 
tralia, and capital and labour thus set free from the 
flour-milling industry could be devoted to the develop- 
ment of our primary industries. 
But were the farmer to advocate general free trade 
in New Zealand, including the abolition of the duty on 
wheat, not only would he be a public benefactor, but 
he himself would probably be the greatest gainer of all. 
At present, protection is afforded to industries employ- 
ing only some 5 per cent. of the population.* These are 
for the most part manufacturing industries, which 
produce only a fraction of the total supply necessary. 
Consequently, prices are raised to the consumer on the 
whole supply. The farmer would discover that many 
articles necessary for the production of wheat would be 
*See Cost of Living Report, H-18, page lxxx. 
12 
