Wheat (1) - Part 2

Image 142
image 43 of 100

This transcription is complete

In a letter to the merchant shipping firm the Minister, I think on the following Tuesday, gave them until the following Friday to say whether or not they would come in in competition with the Westralian Farmers, Ltd. On the evening of that day, about 7 o'clock, I was telephoned for by the secretary of the Wheat Scheme, and asked if I would attend the Wheat Scheme office. I asked them to get on to Mr. Taylor as I had something else to do. Mr. Taylor could not be found, and as the matter was of some importance I went to the Wheat Scheme office. There were present on that occasion Mr. Baxter, the Ministry; Mr. Sutton of the Board, and Mr. Hall, the secretary. Mr. Sutton informed me that the time had expired for the merchants to put in their agreements. This was about the 2nd of November. Mr. Baxter then informed me that he had received the letter from the other merchants definitely declining to meet us in competition in the way suggested. He also said they had now put in another price in which they offered to do the business if we were excluded from competition, at I think one farthing less. The letter conveying the further cut price was put in by these merchants after they had received the letter telling them that our contract was accepted. There was no doubt about that. 3111. You say that Mr. Baxter said he had received the letter when he met you? —Yes. He had the letter on his table that night, definitely stating the merchants refusal to compete with us, but offering to do the work at a farthing less provided we were excluded. 3112. Did Mr. Baxter tell you he had met them by deputation that day? —No. 3113. I will read you the extract from the file of the report of the deputation which waited on Mr. Baxter. (Extract read.) Is the the first part of this report correct? —Yes. 3114. I will read you the concluding part of the extract with regard to what Mr. Keys said. (Extract Read.)? —That offer was to come in on even competition. That letter was never mentioned to me. After we received this letter they asked us if we would do it at their price and we replied in the affirmative. Then we received their acceptance. Whether Mr. Baxter said so or not, they could not do otherwise. If they had I would have stood off. Had they done so, I would have sued them. The business was closed with us. The merchants had been given an opportunity of coming in on an equal footing, but they came along that Friday and cut the price another farthing, on condition that we should be excluded from business. 3115. From the fact that they submitted a new price, it would seem that they went away from the deputation under the impression that Mr. Baxter was still open to receive offers? —Yes. I think Mr Baxter's reply to the deputation was decidedly weak. I understand that he denies that he gave them any such impression. However, that is our case. We received a definite acceptance and, up to Friday night, they were given an opportunity of coming in on even terms. When I went to the office on that Friday night, Mr. Sutton said to me," You are putting yourselves in an awkward position, because if you insist upon holding the Government to the contract they have made with you, you will take away from the farmer a farthing per bushel; if you voluntarily withdraw now we can accept this last offer by the merchants and do the business for less money. Are you prepared to withdraw ?" I at once said no , that I was not. I told him that, in order to keep these local co-operative societies at work and alive, in my opinion it was a cheap price for the farmer to pay; because if the merchants were prepared to lose, as their letter stated, on their contract, they were not losing it for the good of their health. Their attempt to eliminate us was their deliberate attempt to kill our movement. 3116. Did you say Mr. Baxter asked you to withdraw? —No. Mr. Sutton asked whether we would be prepared to withdraw. Mr. Baxter was present in the chair. 3117. What action did Mr. Baxter take? — He said "We are not going back on our contract at all. If you hold us to it we will give it you." 3118. By Hon J. F. ALLEN : He was a party to the proposition that you should withdraw? —He certainly was present. 3119. By the CHAIRMAN : Suppose you had been in his place, and holding definite opinions, would you not have said straight out," It is useless to make such a proposal because I am not going to allow it "? —I should have said " If you people representing the farmers are prepared to jettison your organisation, you can do so ." 3120. But if you had held the strong opinions with which the Minister is credited, would you not have said definitely to your officers,"I am not going to allow any withdrawal"? —It must be understood that when Mr. Sutton made the proposal I definitely and quickly flopped it down. Mr. Baxter had not much time to intervene. Now let me put this to you : we say that that earlier cut price would never have been put in by the merchants if our organisation had not been in existence; and we proved that by the fact that the same merchant firms are being paid very much more in the Eastern states for lesser services. Directly they separated from us they quoted on their own, and I insist that those merchants would never have cut their previous year's quotes except to blow us out of the business. 3121. You do not think it had anything to do with the action of the Australian Wheat Board? —No, look at the prices they are getting in the East. Our organisation handling wheat successfully was because of that cut price being put in by the merchants. Our actions in obtaining that contract were strictly honourable and above board. The Government showed us no favouritism. We were asked exactly the same questions as the merchants and they were offered the business on the same terms. We offered to do the business in competition with the merchants but they would not take it on that condition. 3122. By Mr. BROWN : What was the date of your acceptance of the offer? —On the 27th October, 1917. Now in regard to the price at which we obtained this business; in Victoria the duty of the acquiring agent is to receive wheat at sidings, weigh it, sample it,and stack it. The Government provide dunnage, roofing, timber,iron and hessian. The contract is really a stacking one. As soon as the depot stacks are built a clearance is given, with the exception of quality, the risk of which is limited to one-eighth penny per bushel. Directly the stack is completed they get a quittance of their liability except regarding quality, and in that respect the liability is limited to one-eighth penny. For their services they get 2⅜d. per bushel. 3123. By the CHAIRMAN: They issue the certificates? —Presumably, yes. For our temporary stacking we got 1⅝ d. per bushel. In Victoria, if it is required to deliver it to the mills, if prior to the 15th March, when the stacks have only just been completed, it is trucked away, they get an additional 1½d. per bushel simply to put it into the truck out of their own stack. If these deliveries out of that stack are after the 15th March they get 1⅞d., the extra three eighths being on account of possible broken bags, and additional cost of handling. Our total remuneration 1⅝d., while their total remuneration is 2⅜d. plus 1½d. 3124. What you have to do for 1⅝d. costs in Victoria 3⅞d. ? —Yes, and their stations and sidings are much easier to handle than are ours,while their inspectors can do more than ours and their cost of travelling is not nearly so great as ours. We make our profit out of the 1⅝d. In the East they are handling more than double the funds and making a profit on each of these services, whereas we only have the one service. In 1915-16 when we were all handling the wheat we got 3d. per bushel, which included provision for reconditioning, dunnage sites etc., and next year the commission was 3½d. per bushel. The commission on wheat delivered to mills is 3d. 3125. What was the extra half penny put on for?—I presume the merchants did not consider the remuneration for the first year sufficient. 3126. By Mr. HARRISON : Would it be considered on account of the extra cost of handling, the breakage of bags, etc,?— The second year's quote was not for handling the previous year's wheat. 3127. But the second was a halfpenny more?—The contract was for a halfpenny more than the first year. The commission on wheat delivered to the mills is 3d., that is dunnage, restacking sites, etc. The cost