I wish to make a statement before this Bill is passed. On the Committee Stage Senator Wilson brought in an amendment which brought in the question of the drawing of beet as it is affected by this Bill. I only supported Senator Wilson's amendment because it affected a small number of people in whom I am interested. I tried to get in an amendment on the Report Stage to take in this small section of people, but I was told that the amendment was not in order because an amendment which was nearly the same had been defeated in Committee. I should like to make a special appeal to the Minister on behalf of a few farmers and growers of beet. I am not interested in any other carriers or hauliers. A number of small growers of beet have appealed to me during the past week. They put up to me—what I knew already—the great hardships under which they will labour unless some special arrangement is made for them under this Bill. During the Committee Stage a number of Senators including, I think, Senator Wilson, said that they were quite satisfied with the arrangement under the Bill, because the farmer or beet grower who had a lorry could draw his neighbour's beet for nothing. Those people are very simple if they think that the farmer or beet grower who owns a lorry is going to draw his neighbour's beet for nothing. I would like to make a special appeal to the Minister to exempt the very few farmers and growers of beet who are not ordinary carriers, and to allow them to charge their neighbours the small amount which they have been in the habit of charging them, a much smaller amount than is charged by the regular carriers. Otherwise, I am quite satisfied from what I know that a number of these small growers would be put out of the business of growing beet altogether.
There is another matter to which the Minister referred on the last day. He said, when replying: "I was very glad to hear certain Senators referring to the fact that the price of beet is not high enough." He went on to say that certain people were carrying on a campaign to force down the price of sugar. I interjected that when the price of sugar was smaller the price of beet was higher. The Minister denied that, and said that my information was wrong. I have here certain figures showing that when the price of beet was 46/- a ton the price of sugar was 25/3 a cwt. The price of sugar remained in or about that figure until September, 1934. When the price of beet went down to 37/6 the price of sugar went up to 28/6. Now, when the price of beet is, as it will prove to be, still lower at the flat rate, the price of sugar has gone up by 5/9 per cwt., or 11/6 a bag. If I were to go back further, to the beginning of the year 1926, I think the price of sugar beet to the three years guarantors was 54/- a ton or 15½ per cent. of sugar which realised a price of over £3 a ton to a very large number of growers—every good grower, in fact, who cultivated his beet properly. The price of sugar at that time was about 4½d. per lb., which, of course, was a very small price then compared to the very high price of beet. Then, of course, there was a different arrangement in regard to the price of beet. Those who guaranteed a three years' supply were paid 54/- a ton. So the Minister, when he said my information was wrong, evidently had not gone into the figures or he was trying to make out that the price of sugar was raised in the last Budget to pay for the price of beet, which is a ridiculous contention. It was raised to bring in revenue, regardless of everything else.
