Wheat (1) - Part 2

Image 153
image 54 of 100

This transcription is complete

to act on behalf of the Scheme, and under the terms of their engagement they are not responsible for the provision of stacking sites.

I have informed the Commission in all sincerity that the copy of that letter which is on the Government files, is not a correct copy of the letter it purports to be, because one word has been left out and it alters entirely the whole sense of the letter. The letter which is on the file of the Government department---unless it has been since altered---reads, ...... under the terms of their engagement they are responsible for the provision of stacking sites. You will notice that the word not is missing. The actual original sent to the Commissioner contains that word not. The copy is an absolute contradiction of the original. Now, if that word appears in the letter on the departmental file, it has been put in since by the officers of the Wheat Department. If we were responsible for the stacking sites, as the copy of their file suggests we are, why should the Scheme say to the Railway Department that they assume that there will be nothing debited by the department against the Scheme? You will see, therefore, the word not makes it what it was intended to be, an appeal to the Railway Commissioner to tell the Scheme their responsibility. I pointed this out to Mr. Baxter as proof that Mr. Keys was well aware that he suggested we should provide stacking sites, and that the original contract set out in that letter provided that the Government were to do so. I want to put in as evidence replies which Mr. Keys made to those charges, and opposite to those replies our replies to Mr. Keys' statements. You will see from those statements that in every case, the statements which we made to Mr. Baxter and which Mr. Keys attempted to refute, were proved by us to the hilt. As regards the particular item which I am stressing, I particularly call attention to it, because I do not want it to be thought that when the agreement was signed, it did, in any circumstances whatever make our contract in any way better than the original letters which passed between us. Mr Keys quotes to Mr Baxter this:—

The letter referred to contains this clause— "This year the Westralian Farmers, Ltd have been appointed the sole Government acquiring agent to act on behalf of the Scheme, and under the terms of their engagement they are hold responsible for the provision of stacking sites."

I knew either my copy or their copy must be wrong, so I went into the Railway Department and saw the original and found that my copy was correct. Mr Keys comment continues—

And yet on reading this the Westralian Farmers cheerfully say that the Scheme were providing the sites. Further comment is needless.

When I show you the letter that Mr Keys was quoting from, the word "not" appears in it, and in the copy that is on the file the word "not" does not appear. The obvious meaning of the letter therefore was that it should contain the word "not". As Mr Keys himself says—further comment is needless. There are many questions regarding the provision of dunnage which was also agreed to by the Government. Although we started on the 30th November requisitioning dunnage and repeatedly asked for it, it was not supplied, and actually when we started to receive wheat on the 4th January, here was not a single stick of dunnage, and not one truck available for us.

3216. By the CHAIRMAN: Was that the reason why the wheat had to be put on the ground?—Absolutely. What else could we do with it? This will show you the position. The farmers have been used to bringing i their wheat from the second week in December, but the Scheme would not allow them to bring it in until the 1st January excepting at Tambellup zone, where it was about a fortnight later. In their decision the Scheme may have been perfectly correct, but the result was that when the 1st January did come there was a much bigger rush than there would otherwise have been, and you must remember that farmers were taking their wheat to over 300 sidings, and that the depots at Spencer's Brook were not ready, dunnage had not been provided, and trucks were not available. That is the condition upon which we opened our business.

3217. By Mr HARRISON: That last answer of yours, regarding the dunnage, was rather sweeping?—I will let it stand. There were certain sites at which we had our own dunnage. On the list of sidings, to provide dunnage for which we had to requisition the Governement, there was not one place at which the Government had succeeded in providing dunnage.

3218. By the CHAIRMAN: And a requisition was put in in sufficient time?—Yes, on the 30th November.

3219. And the material was not supplied until the 4th January?—No, and in many instances we were not supplied until the beginning of March, when all the wheat was in. I want to refer to a matter which appeared in the public Press regarding a siding called Badjaling. We point out in December in writing, on three different occasions, that the Scheme were not making any provision for a proper stacking site there. The only stacking site at Badjaling was covered with putrid wheat, and the Scheme were making no attempt to remove it. We therefore wrote officially to the Scheme on three different occasions asking them to attend to the matter.The Minister happened to be in the district on the 27th December, and on the 28th the Minister sent to Mr Keys the following telegram:—

No provision for accepting wheat Badjaling next week, kindly shake things up, farmers annoyed.

In spite of the fact that the telegram from Mr Baxter reached the Scheme office after we had written three different letters asking for the provision necessary at that stacking site, Mr Keys sent along that telegram to us in a covering letter, complaining that we were not ready and not attending to our job, and practically asking the reason for this. In our reply we asked them to send to the Minister copies of the three letters we had written them during December, in which we ourselves pointed out that Badjaling was not ready and that the site would have to be put in order. I want the Commission to listen to Mr Keys defence of that business. the old stack in which the putrid wheat was left happened to be handled by Dreyfus and Co. Mr Keys said—

The Westralian Farmers Ltd, in their letter twisted the meaning of this "No provision for accepting wheat" into "no provision for stacking wheat" As a matter of fact our complaint was made because no representative had been arranged for to go to Badjaling to receive the wheat. In this instance the farmers are trying to draw a red herring across the trail.

He further adds that this wheat had been sold by the Scheme and, in any case, after the site had been cleaned up, it would not have been made a suitable stacking site for that season's wheat. They say that we attempted to suggest that when we got the telegram stating "no provision for accepting wheat," it meant that we were making no provision for placing men there to handle the wheat. Considering that this telegram was sent on the 27th December, that we were not allowed to receive wheat until the 4th January, that we could not possibly do anything until the stacking site was ready, that Badjaling was an unattended site, without any residents in the place, I suggest to the Commission that Mr Keys is asking too much when he asks us to be ready to send men downon the 27th December to do wirk which we could not start until the 4th January. There is no doubt that the complaint which was made to Mr Baxter by the farmers, the only complaint, was that the stacking site was not ready.

3220. By Mr HARRISON: Did not the farmers deliver wheat there contrary to instructions with regard to the date on which it could be received?—No, we were not allowed to receive wheat anywhere before the 1st January.

3221. I thought it might possibly have been done in some of the outback centres?—I do not know if this happened. I want the Commission to note the fact that Mr keys says that even when they had cleaned up that site, it would not have been made a suitable place for stacking this season's wheat. When we got that letter we were surprised and asked for an interview with Mr Baxter, at which Mr Keys would be present. At that interview it was repeatedly and emphatically stated by Mr keys that it was never at any time suggested that wheat would be stacked at Badjaling. I then handed to the Minister a letter dated the 19th December, written by Mr Keys in reply to one of these letters of complaint. the letter is as follows:—

I have to advise that an inspection has been made of this site and efforts are being made to have same cleared up ready for stacking wheat early in January.