DOMINION'S MEAT TERMS

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXXII, Issue 22139, 19 June 1935, Page 10

DOMINION'S MEAT TERMS

New Zealand now stands alone, according to a report from London published this morning, in resisting the imposition of levies on meat imported by Britain. From that it would appear that Australia has been offered terms causing her to revise her negative attitude. New Zealand's objection is reported to be "unshakable" and Mr. Forbes and Mr. Coates will have the support of this country in refusing to accept voluntarily a device whereby, through the levy, hard-pressed New Zealand farmers will be forced to subsidise their British competitors. The attitude of the Dominion's representatives appears to be that they will not withdraw their objection to the levy and will only accept it under protest and on certain terms. These are stated to be (1), the conclusion of a five-year agreement, (2), Britain to accept responsibility for enforcing the limitation of shipments, and (3), the formation of an Empire board of control. From this it would seem that the meat negotiations are leading toward an arrangement which will combine both levies and quotas. Originally these two evils were regarded as alternatives and were so stated in the White Paper. It will be very bad business if the Dominions are edged into a position where they are ready to accept both. If that comes to pass, the New Zealand Government will be partly to blame, because of its insistence on the necessity of retaining import restrictions. Apart from that, the terms New Zealand is reported to be seeking are soundly conceived. A definition of British policy embodied in a long-term agreement—and five years is not too long—is an essential to restore some measure of stability and certainty in the meat trade. New Zealand farmers cannot continue to work from quarter to quarter,; if they are to get anywhere, they must know where they stand in relation to their market. Definition is also sorely needed in other produce markets, and particularly some firm statement of British agricultural policy, of the directions in which it proposes to advance and to what extent. Furthermore. if there are to be quotas, someone must see they are observed. Britain can exercise effective control, and only Britain. New Zealand is therefore right to insist that Britain should accept the responsibility. That is the only way to check those who are prepared to sign quota agreements but take no steps to secure their observance, thus penalising others who actively honour their signatures.