1417. You have approximately at your siding 100,000 bushels of wheat?—Yes.

1418. About one-third of that will be provided for under the proposed bulk handling and storage system. What saving is it to the other persons who own the other two-thirds of the wheat?—You claim that as the best accommodation that can be provided for the coming crop?

1419. That is the Bill which was thrown out the other day?—I took it you had skeleton sheds at various depots, and that the Government would utilise those for other operations.

1420. The other operations would be in the position that they are in to-day?—That is a matter for the Government. They know the quantity of wheat we shall produce. It is not a matter for the farmers what accommodation they shall provide.

1421. You realise it is impossible to put up sufficient storage for the whole of the wheat?—I admit that.

1422. Will you put it in this way, that owing to the present abnormal conditions you want to avail yourself of the system of bulk handling?—That would not be fair. I have not sprung into farming by the abnormal conditions. The position is this: the farmer is eager to effect economics where he can, because he is up against a tough problem.

1423. You want to be satisfied with the economy if it can be established?—Yes. You cannot convince any fair-thinking man that any stable method of storage would not be more economical than the wasteful system of bags.

1424. It has been stated that wheat will have to be stored probably for three years based on the average yield in Western Australia, which is 15 million bushels; in three years that is 45 million bushels, and you only provide wheat storage for five million bushels?—That is immediately.

1425. That is all that is required?—Canada faced the same problem as Western Australia is facing today, and she built silos and found that when she had modern bulk handling the bins that had been erected were of great service.

1426. I suppose you know that Canada only provided for one-third of the harvest?—With the method of bulk handling, but there is separate storage accommodation, wooden structures.

1427. They provide wooden silos?—They did provide a number of wooden structures, bins or silos, and they utilised them for storing the wheat, and when bulk handling became established, these bins or silos were of great advantage.

1428. Do you understand that the experts have turned timber silos down?—They may to-day. These silos would be found of great advantage when bulk handling was carried out. If we had to build additional silos we have in Western Australia the timber that is fitted for the work, and these additional silos, if built, would not be a loss or a burden on the State.

1429. You as a farmer and chairman of a co-operative company, are of opinion that instead of spending a lot of money in concrete silos, we should spend the money in erecting wooden silos and more of them?—Yes.

1430. You referred to co-operative societies erecting the silos. Would they guarantee the Government for the expenditure if the Government provided the money?—Yes.

1431. Do you think these small co-operative societies with a capital of £1,000 or £2,000 are in a position to stand the strain?—The position is in regard to the responsibility the farmer is called on to provide. Take it for argument that there was a debit of 3d. per bushel until the silo was paid for. I would come along with my wheat into a bin, and in a few days I come back again with the same bag full of wheat. I would be purchasing the silo with a bag that would be wasted in three months.

1432. It would be necessary to ascertain whether there were any means of taking the wheat away from our shores first?—That is the difficulty, but the darkest side may have the sun on it to-morrow.

1433. You said there were several agents at the sidings competing one with the other, and when a co-operative society turned down wheat as not being up to f.a.q. the farmer could go to another agent who would accept it. Are you aware of the fact that the Australian Wheat Board this year decided that there was only to be one agent at every siding up to 50,000 bushels on account of the increased cost and increased competition?—I am aware of the fact.

1434. If it was not handed over to one firm there would be only one agent?—It would not be workable unless he was presentable. Take a centre where there are 20 farmers owning a co-operative company, a piece of machinery that transacts their business. If the acquiring agent had no connection with them and was in no way sympathetic or was an opponent to the company, it would be a hard thing to get those men to hand their wheat to that agent.

1435.