sign-in
Home
/
Wheat (1) - Part 2
/
Image 172
Wheat (1) - Part 2
Image 172
image 73 of 100
If you need a symbol, fraction or a wider dash please highlight, copy (Ctrl C) and paste (Ctrl V): £ — ¼ ½ ¾ ⅓ ⅔ ⅛ ⅜ ⅝ ⅞ ⊚ 🡹 /|\
WEDNESDAY, 24th JULY, 1918. (At Perth.) Present: Hon. W. C. Angwin, M.L.A. (Chairman) Hon. J. F. Allen, M.L.C., Hon. R. G. Ardagh, M.L.C. S. M. Brown, Esg., M.L.A., T. H. Harrison, Esq., M.L.A. ALEXANDER FRANCIS PEARSE, recalled: 3665. By Mr. HARRISON: You mentioned yesterday that there would be a saving of £60,000 on the sheds for the accommodation of four million bushels in bins. There would still be about six million bushels left? — Yes. 3666. Would that not warrant a further expenditure of capital in laying down close flooring on stacking sites? — Yes. That work is being done this year. 3667. Your chief fear is in regard to the weevil pest? — Yes. 3668. In receiving wheat from the coming harvest the objective would be to prevent moisture from above or below getting into the wheat? — Yes. 3669. And any capital expenditure in that direction would be warranted on account of the saving which would result from it? — Undoubtedly. 3670. You stated that the Eastern States had been able to secure covers for the wheat in transit on the railway? — I said that, as far as I was able to observe, this was the case. I was there during the summer months. When there was wet weather I noticed the trucks were covered with tarpaulins. 3671. You noticed the reverse here? — I said the railways could not get them here. We have agitated for a long time on that matter. We have tried to get covers by advocating the use of the heaviest kind of sacking and tarring it, but we could not get any of that. 3672. If the Eastern States can get this covering why cannot Western Australia get it? — I think over there they must have a bigger proportion of tarpaulins than we have in relation to their rolling stock. 3673. You would not be surprised to learn that one of the leading experts has stated that a great fault in Western Australia was the lack of covering for the wheat in transit? — No. When the wet weather has come we have been unable to get covers. 3674. You have seen Dr. Duval? — Yes. 3675. Did he make any special mention of that matter? — No. He only praised up the Spencer's Brook Depôt. Most of his remarks were confined to Mr. Keys, who travelled over with him. He has now returned to the United States. 3676. In your calculation of the five per cent. loss on the country wheat, did you include the cost of handling and re-bagging, etc.? — No. 3677. That would represent a considerable amount in addition? — It would represent a fair amount. 3678. Your five per cent. is merely based on the quality of the wheat? — Yes; what we lost in the weight of the wheat from the ravages of weevil, and also we lose through wheat being split and otherwise lost. Mr. Keys does not agree with me there. 3679. You realise that the cost of handling and restitching new bags is a very considerable item? — Yes. I think the price in this morning's paper is 10s. for new bags. This matter does not come under by administration. 3680. By the CHAIRMAN: Regarding the losses of which Mr. Harrison spoke, you make preparations for storing approximately eight million bushels? — Approximately 8½ million bushels. Last year we made provision for that quantity. 3681. If the Government should lose the whole of the five per cent. on the eight million bushels, the loss would be under £40,000; I am taking the guarantee at 3s. 6d. per bushel? — The loss would amount to about £38,000. 3682. So the loss under the present storage system of five per cent., or Mr. Keys estimates three per cent., is to be avoided by an expenditure estimated at £300,000, carrying interest at 5⅜ per cent. Would not, therefore, the erection of bulk stores involve an expenditure far exceeding the actual loss? — That is so. 3683. And then there is no guarantee that there would be no loss even if bulk storage were carried out; there would then be a big loss on the wheat not in bulk storage? — A certain proportion but the loss would be minimised. 3684. Really, from the financial point of view, therefore, it would be cheaper to provide efficient sheds somewhat on the lines of those with which you are working now, than to build bulk storage; I am considering the matter purely from the financial aspect and not at all with reference to weevil? — If you can guarantee sheds free from weevil and other causes of loss, sheds that will keep the wheat dry, there is, of course, no doubt that the present open sheds cost only 2½d. per bushel. whilst bulk storage is going to cost 1s. 3d. per bushel. That proposition is extremely simple. 3685. There would be a further considerable saving if Mr. Keys is right in his estimate? — Yes. But in the erection of these bins one has to take into consideration the sheds that one saves. That is a set-off against the £300,000. By putting four million bushels into bins, one saves the sheds, representing £60,000. 3686. How much wheat have you put in sheds this year? — I think about seven million bushels. 3687. You have got out the costs of the sheds? — Yes. The sheds for the 1917-18 harvest cost £70,405; in addition, there were sidings costing £26,711, and offices, water supply, and outfall drains costing £4,165; or a total of £101,281. The total length of sheds is 17,862 feet by 40 feet. As to the sidings, the rails have been put in at the present day cost of material; and, these together with a certain breaking down value of the sheds, will be available, after the sheds have been emptied, as a set-off against the cost mentioned. 3688. You have fixed a value that you think the material will bring? — It is only an estimate. Of the sheds, I think we will get about 40 per cent. back. The sidings I cannot estimate yet, it is a matter that we shall have to go into with the Railway Department. They are charging us £15 per ton for new rails. 3689. And what are they charging you for the old third class rails? — Ten pounds per ton. A lot of them will not be fit to lift afterwards. 3690. I have seen a lot of third class rails, not these particular rails, thrown out as unfit for other lines, and pulled over and over for some considerable time to make sidings. Those that are left must be the worst of the lot? — The prices are not really fixed yet.
Save edits
prev
|
next
|
all images
|
history