BEEF EXPORTS.

Ashburton Guardian, Volume XLVIII, Issue 10944, 16 June 1927, Page 7

BEEF EXPORTS.

BOARD'S PROPOSAL CRITICISED. (Per Press Association.) AUCKLAND, June 15. A communique received from the New Zealand Meat Producers' Board, dealing with the Dominion's beef industry and stating that the beef export trade was giving much concern to the board, caused some discussion at the monthly meeting of the executive of the Auckland branch of the Farmers:' Union. The board stated that the continued low values had resulted in a marked decline in the amount of beef shipped last year. The board had been investigating the whole position and was at present looking into the Patterson scheme. The scheme was explained in detail by Mr Harding. ''How is the proposed levy to be collected?" asked a member. Mr Harding: From the butchers. Instead of paying a license fee, you would pay so much a head. It is not a form of protection. It would be a bonus and the consumers would benefit. "But won't it increase the cost of living?" asked another. "And the cost of meat?" asked another. "Yes, certainly, but it won't have much affect. Wages will be higher, but not very much," Mr Harding re- i plied. He thought the amount would encourage farmers to breed cattle. He then moved: "That as adequate stocking with cattle is necessary to prevent pastures deteriorating and to maintain production, this meeting approves of the Meat Board's proposal to stimulate the export of beef, and urges the Government to give effect to the same."

The chairman, Mr A. A. Rose: "This scheme looks to me like a man picking himself up by the seat of his trousers and carrying himself around the room. The levy must bd borne by either the producer or consumer. It will increase the cost of living and come right back on the farmer. The scheme might be sound, but there is lai nigger m the* woodpile somewhere, I think." (Laughter.)

Mr C. O. Monroe did not like . the

• principle in the scheme advocated by Mr Harding. It meant raising the price of cattle and increasing the cost of living. It would only protect a small section of the community. Members' of the union had been fighting strenuously to keep down the cost of living. Personally he preferred to tackle the whole industry and not one section. The principle should be broader in its application. At present it was only a "piecemeal affair." Mr W. Lee Martin also spoke against the motion, and eventually it was referred to the Stock Committee for report.