Wheat (1) - Part 1

Image 4
image 4 of 99

This transcription is complete

Fremantle the Harbour Trust would see to the storage and shipping and so forth. The result would be that we would have the wheat board just using the Government organisations existing today to do the work. If the matter is sufficiently interesting for you to follow it up, you will find that, after all, the main part of the work is already done by Government departments. For example, the handling of the wheat, the getting of it down in time to load, the expediting of delivery, the delaying of delivery, and all that sort of thing is done by the agents communicating with the Railway Department. The Railway Department have become experts in regard to handling wheat and marshalling wheat so as to get it down to load the boats when they are in port in numbers beyond the quantity of wheat stored at Fremantle. Therefore, it was not asking the Railway Department to go into something of which they had no knowledge. All that was to be done was just to swing the business off the local agents and swing it on to the central Pool. You will find that at Fremantle the major portion of the work is done by the Harbour Trust. It is true that a fair amount of detail work is carried out by the agents; but those matters that count are done by the Harbour Trust. I felt, therefore, that it was a comparatively simple thing to get out a scheme cutting out all the agents and running the business from the central office. I anticipated that there would be some opposition from the Commissioner of Railways. I thought he would not like the extension of his responsibilities. I had an informal discussion with him just to get an idea as to whether his opposition would be sufficiently strong to prevent me from proceeding. I left him absolutely convinced that there would be no difficulty in getting the Railway Department to work in with us. I had got practically no further when the change of Government came about and I went out and Mr. Mitchell went in. You can take it from me that, had I remained in office, I would today have been handling the wheat direct from the Pool. 17. By the CHAIRMAN : In your opinion there should be full State control, and State management as well ? —Absolutely, during the war period. After the war period, it would depend on a lot of things. 18. Suppose the farmers formed a co-operative society after the style which you suggested just now, does your two years' experience of the scheme suggest that there would be any objection if the farmers could finance it ? —No. That is another phase of the matter which I have discussed with Mr. Harrison and many others. I believe it would be possible to devise a means by which the scheme could be run absolutely on co-operative lines. I have given a good deal of thought to the matter. The body to run it would have to be a truly co-operative concern, not a limited liability company under the guise of co-operation. It would have to be representative of the farmers as distinct from politics, of course. If we could get a truly representative co-operative concern with Government backing to the extent that the Government would co-operate in the shipping and various other matters where Government backing is essential, then, to my mind, it could be made a huge concern of vast benefit to the farmers. Personally, I have always favoured co-operation as distinct from nationalisation. I prefer a co-operative effort when it is on sound co-operative lines, to State enterprise. Consequently, I think that if we got the farmers handling their own product in their own interests, provided the co-operative basis was right, it would be far preferable. That is what I thought would ultimately come as a result of the pool. I do not, however, wish that to be taken as an intimation that I favour the present system. I have a good deal of regard for the work done by the Westralian Farmers, Ltd., but I refuse to recognise them as a truly co-operative concern. I refuse to admit that they are dissociated from politics. I think they are too much intermixed and interwoven with politics to be of lasting benefit to the farmers. I consider that the Government in their association with the Westralian Farmers, Ltd., were too impulsive. I think the matter should have had far more investigation before it was decided on, and certainly should not have been carried out before there had been some opportunity of public discussion. 19. That all depends on the amount of Government backing. Would you confine Government backing to shipment only ? —The trouble is this . If you want to make a success of a co-operative concern, they must not be constantly leaning on the Government; they cannot go on in a lackadaisical way and get into difficulties and then constantly come on the Government. A co-operative concern in Australia is not viewed with a great deal of favour overseas. In England co-operative concerns are highly favoured; they are huge concerns and can get unlimited credit, but in Australia they have not caught on to the same extent. If we have a co-operative concern attempting to deal with the markets of the world, the Government could do the backing for them. Supposing a co-operative concern started to charter boats, a shipping combination would not deal as favourably with that co-operative concern as with the Government. They would view it in this way. A charter would be arranged and they would not utilise the boats —the boats would not be used, and the actual results of the charter would not be forthcoming. But if you get that co-operative concern negotiating with the Government endorsement, that would be a totally different thing. The Government endorsement would give them a standing, but they do not get that in connection with co-operative concerns. 20. By Mr. HARRISON : Do you think co-operative concerns would be able to finance to a good amount ? — I think so. I do not think the financial difficulties would be great. 21. You think that when a co-operative concern had collected the wheat they would be able to give enough advance ? — Yes. You have to bear in mind that we have certain buyers in Australia and these buyers are financed by the banks. Then again, you do not buy all the wheat at once. You do not have all the wheat on your hands before selling; you start selling as soon as the season opens. 22. You do not forecast any difficulties of financing with a co-operative concern ? —I do not think so, under normal conditions. 23. By the CHAIRMAN: You first appointed a board consisting of Mr Field, Mr Gosse, Mr Hammond, and Mr Sutton. Did you have any interest to represent in appointing that boards?▬I want to pay a special tribute to that board. They devoted a good deal of their time in an honorary capacity and assisted materially in gaining what little success we obtained. The reason I had in appointing these men was this. Mr Field was a man with vast knowledge of shipping and commercial matters generally without being connected with wheat buying. Elder, Shenton & Co. do not deal in wheat business, and he had all the qualifications to assist me, yet he was not directly connected with the business. George Wills & Co. did at one time handle wheat, but they have gone out of the business and I was able to get Mr Gosse, who was in the same position, a man of vast knowledge in matters that I was not sufficiently versed in. Then I got Dean Hammond, who was a most valuable man directly interested in the farmers, who had devoted a considerable amount of time in the matter and displayed more than average ability in the business generally. Mr Field and Mr Gosse were selected for the reasons I have stated, and Mr Dean Hammond was added to them. Mr Sutton was called chairman, but actually he was deputy chairman. I was chairman myself, but in my absence Mr Sutton was the chairman. I called them an advisory board because if I had suggested to have a board and pay them fees we should have heard one of the howls which we had in connection with anything that I did at all. Therefore, it was advisable to have an advisory board, but they were to all intents and purposes an executive board. I did nothing without the board: I took the chair and the whole of the papers were placed on the table and I gave them a report. The secretary gave a detailed financial statement: We called the accountant and he gave a statement, and they knew just as much about the scheme as I did. You have no doubt got the minute book? 24.I have it here?▬We took the minutes and anything that was decided upon was entered and was done.There was no difference of opinion about the advisory board. It was an advisory board in name only. 25. They acted as a board of control?▬Absolutely, with myself as chairman. I cannot speak too highly of the assistance they rendered me and the enthusiastic way in which they did their work. 26. I notice the board went on for about two years. Did you find it necessary to have a chairman of the scheme?▬I could not see any need for one. The question was not raised; we had difficulty in