Revision Difference

Wheat (1) - Part 1

Image 67

Revision as of 04:17:30, May 18, 2018
Edited by 101.0.82.66
Revision as of 06:11:52, May 18, 2018
Edited by 101.0.82.66
Line 51: Line 51:
 
1592 But the gristing books were to be examined, not by Mr.Sibbald, but by an officer of the department? That is so.
 
1592 But the gristing books were to be examined, not by Mr.Sibbald, but by an officer of the department? That is so.
  
1593. That officer would not have not have the experience to enable Mr. Sibbald to get any information of value? - No; but of course he could pass on the information. However, I wish to make it clearly understood - and the millers well knew this - that the examination of their books by our inspector of agencies was a confidential one absolutely, and that the information could not  be used in the way suggested by them. I have had several arguments on this with the millers,and so has the inspectors of agencies.
+
1593. That officer would not have not have the experience to enable Mr. Sibbald to get any information of value? - No; but of course he could pass on the information. However, I wish to make it clearly understood - and the millers well knew this - that the examination of their books by our inspector of agencies was a confidential one absolutely, and that the information could not  be used in the way suggested by them. I have had several arguments on this with the millers,and so has the inspectors of agencies. I think the real reason is as disclosed in my second suggestion; that is, with regard to the percentage of flour extraction for Imperial flour orders.
 +
 
 +
1594. No doubt you realise the difficulty of making the public believe that there is confidence as to any information obtained by the Government?- Well, with the Royal Commissions sitting I do not wonder that the public do get that opinion.
 +
 
 +
1595. Are you aware that the action of the millers and the manner in which they dealt with their wheat were the reason why the Farmers' &Settlers' Association and representatives of the Perth Chamber of Commerce waited as a deputation on the Minister for Industries to request him to compulsorily acquire all mills in this State? - I do not know what actuated them in that. I was in the East at the time. But Mr. Keys knows all about that.
 +
 
 +
1596.I notice a reference to the matter in one of the reports we have here. Is there a full report of that deputation? - I do not know. I have been trying to get hold of that report; but that deputation, it must be remembered, waited upon the Minister for Industries. Mr Baxter at the time was in the East. Mr Robinson passed the papers, with his remarks, on to the Premiere, I understand. So the papers became a Premieres' file. I have asked since to be allowed to sight that file, so that we could take copies of what is of interest to the Scheme and put it in our files. I have yet not received an answer to that application.
 +
 
 +
1597. We can get the file if we issue an order for it? - The Commission can obtain it by merely  making a request to the Secretary to the Premiere, I suggest.
 +
 
 +
1598.Has any length of time elapsed since you asked for the file? - Eight or ten days.
 +
 
 +
1599. When the Chamber of Commerce, who, according to their published statements are so much averse to Government interference with private enterprise, take part in a deputation asking for the compulsory acquisi-

Revision as of 06:11:52, May 18, 2018

acter?—Mr. Keys' opinion is that it is far more thorough than any business audit that he has ever had to do with.

1568. You think that in the in the interests of farmers in the Scheme a public audit is more beneficial than a private audit?—It is as efficient.

1569. You think there is nothing to be gained by having an independent audit?— I do not think so. We do not mind what sort of audit it is so long as it is a fair audit. Everything is there for anyone to investigate. The officers would have no objection.

1570. So far as you know there is no reason why there should not be an outside audit made apart from the fact that the Government are responsible for the money guaranteed ?— We have no objection to an outside audit.

1571. By Hon. J. F. ALLLEN: Only on the score of expense? — Yes, and so long as it confined to an audit.

1572. By the CHAIRMAN : With regard to the system of dockages instituted this year, was this the result of an order made by the board, or was the matter left entirely to the sub-agents or acquiring agents? — As the general manager was in control of the Scheme from the 3rd December, I prefer that he should answer this question, as he is in a better position to give you expert information upon any follow-up questions you might care to ask.

1573. This is not a question of expert information. You are secretary of the board, and communications have passed between you and the acquiring agents?—I only suggested that in connection with the follow-up questions. The system was instituted by the general manager and approved by the board.

1574. The acquiring agents did not fix it?—The acquiring agents asked for a scale of dockages to be fixed. The general manager fixed the scale, which was approved by the board and the Minister. My answer refers to this year only.

1575. That is when the complaints have been?—Quite so.

1576. Mr Hammond pointed out that the millers some time ago had received the amount of their equity—That is, dealing with final repayments for 1915-16 wheat—while the farmers have not received theirs yet. Is that so?— I answered that yesterday in referring to question 546 of Mr. Baxter's evidence. You will find it in my statement.

1577. The millers are still retaining, what?—About £29,000.

1578. In other words, the millers were not paid their amount of their equity, but they kept it?—That is so. They may have been outstanding in their accounts to that extent practically all through.

1579. In fact, the millers had for some considerable time been carrying on their business at the expense of the Pool?—Partially that is so yes.

1580. A complaint was made here by the poultry farmers, and we wish to know whether the system of handing over the control of damaged wheat to one agent has operated detrimentally to the poultry famers as regards to price?—The poultry farmers say yes, but Mr. Keys is of opinion that they are now paying a fair thing for what they are getting. There was a time, when we did not have control, that the poultry farmers were getting wheat practically for nothing.

1581. You do not think they are paying more than the value of the wheat?—Our instructions to our selling agents, Dalgety & Co., are that they should only charge a fair thing.

1582. If the poultry farms purchase wheat which poisons their poultry, would you consider they were paying above the value of the wheat?—Undoubtedly.

1583. You desire the agents to deal fairly as regards price?—Certainly. The basis is 4s. 9d. for f.a.q. wheat locally.

1584.And as regards inferior wheat?—Allowance is to be made accordingly.

1585. The poultry farmers who came before the Commission stated that experts had recommended them to use the best wheat obtainable in order to carry on their business successfully. Why are they not allowed to buy f.a.q. wheat from the Pool?—It has been the policy of the board right through that all wheat of f.a.q quality should be reserved for human consumption, that whilst there was inferior wheat considered quite good enough for poultry feeding and breeding and for the pigs and other stock, no f.a.q. wheat should be sold for those purposes.

1586. Did the members of the board seek advice from poultry experts on that matter before coming to that decision?—I do not know. That was decided mainly upon Mr. Sutton's advice.

1587. Then the position is that while wheat f.a.q. is being stacked these poultry farmers are unable to purchase it until it becomes inferior?—From the Scheme. We happen to know that certain parcels of f.a.q. wheat go get on the metropolitan market. The poultry people, if they are keen, can pick it up.

1588. But that is only with the permission of the Minister?—Not necessarily so.

1589.I thought no wheat was to be sold without the permission of the Minister, not even put on the railway? - Fortunately or unfortunately, what happens is this: There are some storekeepers or produce merchants who are also farmers, and they as farmers can sell or give their wheat to themselves, and if they as produce merchants like to retail it out there is nothing in the Act to prevent it.

1590. Really, they are evading the intention and the spirit of the Act.

1591. In one of your answers relative to the gristing books, I note you stated that the millers were not willing to hand over the gristing books for inspection on the ground that in all probability Mr. Sibbald, or the Manager of the Scheme, would review the information contained in those books in connection with another mill, or that there was a possibility of his doing so? - Yes; when he left the scheme and returned to that mill, as the millers thought he was likely to do so.

1592 But the gristing books were to be examined, not by Mr.Sibbald, but by an officer of the department? That is so.

1593. That officer would not have not have the experience to enable Mr. Sibbald to get any information of value? - No; but of course he could pass on the information. However, I wish to make it clearly understood - and the millers well knew this - that the examination of their books by our inspector of agencies was a confidential one absolutely, and that the information could not be used in the way suggested by them. I have had several arguments on this with the millers,and so has the inspectors of agencies. I think the real reason is as disclosed in my second suggestion; that is, with regard to the percentage of flour extraction for Imperial flour orders.

1594. No doubt you realise the difficulty of making the public believe that there is confidence as to any information obtained by the Government?- Well, with the Royal Commissions sitting I do not wonder that the public do get that opinion.

1595. Are you aware that the action of the millers and the manner in which they dealt with their wheat were the reason why the Farmers' &Settlers' Association and representatives of the Perth Chamber of Commerce waited as a deputation on the Minister for Industries to request him to compulsorily acquire all mills in this State? - I do not know what actuated them in that. I was in the East at the time. But Mr. Keys knows all about that.

1596.I notice a reference to the matter in one of the reports we have here. Is there a full report of that deputation? - I do not know. I have been trying to get hold of that report; but that deputation, it must be remembered, waited upon the Minister for Industries. Mr Baxter at the time was in the East. Mr Robinson passed the papers, with his remarks, on to the Premiere, I understand. So the papers became a Premieres' file. I have asked since to be allowed to sight that file, so that we could take copies of what is of interest to the Scheme and put it in our files. I have yet not received an answer to that application.

1597. We can get the file if we issue an order for it? - The Commission can obtain it by merely making a request to the Secretary to the Premiere, I suggest.

1598.Has any length of time elapsed since you asked for the file? - Eight or ten days.

1599. When the Chamber of Commerce, who, according to their published statements are so much averse to Government interference with private enterprise, take part in a deputation asking for the compulsory acquisi-