I was pointing out earlier to-day the problems affecting agriculture at present, and suggesting that the greatest difficulty of all from which agriculture suffers to day is in respect of the cost of production. That difficulty in respect of cost of production has been brought about by the present policy of the Government in which, in the development of secondary industry in the country, no regard is paid to the effects it is likely to have on our primary industry, with the result that some of the essential raw materials for agricultural production have been forced up to an artificial level, which has reduced the margin of profit to such an extent that in many cases that margin of profit has disappeared. We must take into account that we are selling in the world market, in open competition with other countries, which have the most modern appliances for the production of agricultural commodities. If we are going to compete, or to have any hope of competing at all, we can do so only on level terms, and the conditions will have to be as good here as in other countries.
I was going on to point out the output per man per annum in the various countries to which I referred, and I said that, in New Zealand, the output per man per annum is £230; in Holland and Denmark about £210; in England something under £200, and here in this country about £70. The fact strikes one immediately. The discrepancy in the output between this country and any other country engaged in agriculture is so great that one is forced to the conclusion that something is seriously wrong here. When one takes that figure of £70 per man per annum and finds, at the same time, that we are paying agricultural wages at the rate of 27/- per week, amounting to £70 4s. per annum, one immediately begins to realise why the number of people engaged in agriculture has fallen so much in recent years. We know that during the last few years the number of people engaged in agriculture in this country has been reduced by 43,000, and that is in itself an indication of whether our agricultural industry is prosperous or not.
If you examine the various methods of agricultural production adopted in New Zealand, Holland, Denmark, England and in this country, and compare the output of by-products of say, live stock, you are again forced to the conclusion that there is something seriously wrong with the output in this country. Take, for instance the case of milk. In Denmark, for every 100 gallons delivered to creameries during the peak summer months there are 70 gallons delivered in the lowest winter month. In Finland, where cows have to be housed for eight months on account of the very severe climatic conditions, and get only four months pasturage, for every 100 gallons of milk supplied to creameries there in the highest peak month in the summer time — grazing time — there are 30 gallons supplied in the lowest month. Now, in this country, for every 100 gallons of milk in the peak summer month we only, in the lowest winter month, supply from five to seven gallons of milk. That is to say, five to seven gallons and 100 gallons, as against 70 gallons and 100 gallons in Denmark.
On examining how that produce is marketed one finds that we are a very erratic supplier of produce on the export market. We are on the export market sometimes only during a period of four months, and then we disappear. Naturally, people who would wish to take large supplies of our surplus produce — big factories handling huge quantities of foodstuffs — turn to countries that will give them regular and definite supplies of butter, eggs, bacon, and so on; and that is where other countries have beaten us hollow. These big factories cannot rely on regular, steady supplies from this country at all. While we were producing a regular supply during the summer period, very often that supply disappears entirely during the winter period. The Minister made just a passing reference to marketing, though that is a very important aspect of the problem that we have to face. I do not know what the Minister has done in that respect, or how far he has gone to examine and explore the requirements and the particular type of commodities that the people on the other side want, or what examination of the problem has been made by the Minister or by his Department. For instance, I have a quotation here regarding the Smithfield market. We all realise, of course, that we sell mostly on other markets, but taking the amount of stuff sold on the Smithfield market in one week, and the quantity supplied from this country one is amazed at the small amount we supply to the greatest market in Britain. The aggregate amount of agricultural produce dealt with on the Smithfield market in the first week of March of this year was 9,357 tons, and of that we only supplied 152 tons. We only supplied 11 tons out of 4,911 tons of beef and veal dealt with; 12 tons out of 2,904 tons of mutton and lamb; 100 of the 854 tons of pork; 1 of the 99 tons of bacon; 21 of the 336 tons of poultry and game; 7 tons out of 144 tons of rabbits; no eggs out of 59 tons sold, and no butter out of 50 tons butter and cheese. That shows that there is a vast field to be explored, and that we have no information whatever as to the requirements of those markets. One cannot expect the farmers — who are the people engaged in agriculture — to do that job; it is essentially a job for the Minister and his Department.
We pay a fair amount of attention to production, but little or no attention to the marketing of what we are producing; and the agriculturists here in this country are handing over their produce to other people to market. We know, that in order to market our produce, live stock and other commodities, it must be graded and sorted; and we are trusting other people to do that and we make no real examination of the export market ourselves.
Taking once again the example that I gave in reference to milk, it may be said that while Denmark can supply 70 gallons of milk in the winter for every 100 gallons in the summer, our milk supply to the creameries in the winter period practically disappears. The cause of that is that we do not go in for winter feeding and winter dairying, and when I refer to winter dairying I am including to a great extent the feeding of our store cattle as well, because in this country above any other we allow our cattle to lose condition, and there is enormous wastage as a result of this loss of condition during the winter period. At any rate, we have seriously fallen short of other countries by allowing that wastage to go on. We have allowed that wastage to go on. In reference to markets, especially to the Smithfield market, I am told that the reason why the Scotch beef has always commanded the best price on the London market is because it has a distinct quality above any other beef and that we do not produce in this country beef of the same grade or quality. I am informed that the reason is that the Scotch farmer, from the very start, feeds the young calf and keeps his store, especially in the calf stage, in excellent condition. There are certain fat cells that fill in that period which, if they are neglected in that period, can never be filled at a later stage. Of course, it is a well-known fact that we neglect our calves at that period. When you do that, you can never produce that nice mixed cut——
