THE QUOTA SYSTEM

Ashburton Guardian, Volume 53, Issue 251, 4 August 1933, Page 2

THE QUOTA SYSTEM

THE FARMERS' POINT OF VIEW. REPLY TO MANUFACTURERS. (Special to the "Guardian.-") ' WELLINGTON, August 3. Mr J. Pow (Dominion secretary of the New Zealand Farmers' Union) has submitted the following statement in. reply to recent remarks by Mr P. L. Hutchison (president of the Canterbury Manufacturers' Association). "Mr Hutchinson < purported to be dealing with the liritish quota system and its. effect on Now Zealand local industries, but this subject mainly served as an opening for comment on the controversial subject of tariffs, A Royal Commission has been specially appointed to hear evidence and to form a judgment on that evidence. Manufacturers, importers, farmers and other folk have faee opportunities of appearing before this Commission. It is unfortunate that there should be so many self-appointed amateur commissioners trying to 'give a lead' to the official commission. Surely, at this stage, while the whole matter is sub judice, such conduct borders on impropriety. It is not the traditional British conception of fair-play. New Zealanders, with a long and broad view of national welfare, are hoping to have a friendly understanding and co-ope-ration of town and country interests, but the achievement of this ideal is not helped by Mr Hutchison's partisan tactics. His recent speech' and similar statements of his during the last two or three months could serve only to make a gap—instead ef the desired bridge-between town and country. Everybody knows the belief of the manufacturers that New Zealand can be benefited by high protective tariffs. Also everybody knows the be-. lief of the Farmers' Union and kindred bodies that such tariffs operate against the national welfare. In due course ' the Royal Commission will deliver its verdict on the various issues. Farm Costs ancJ Returns. "Without going into all the controversial points raised by Mr Hutchinson it is only fair to the farmers to make some comment on several of his assertions. For example, he said: : Until lately the Home market has . been practically unlimited at very remunerative prices.' Just what does Mr Hutchinson mean by the words 'lately,' amd 'remunerative'? The following index figures of farm expenditure and export prices (taking the year 1914 as the base, 1000) show that the farmers' position has been a losing one for some years:—

These figures, show that in 1932 it required about £144 spent on a farm in order to receive £IOO for produce. As the preceding years also showed a serious balance against the farmers, it will be .recognised that they have rather lacked ' .remuneration!' during this period. . ~ - "With regard to the statement, 'we must manufacture as much as is ppssible, and import as little as possible,' Mr Hutchinson should bear the following facts in mind: "(1) An extremely large percentage of our primary products must be exported, since local consumption accounts for only 5 per cent, of our wool, 6 per cent, of our cheese, 7 per cent, of our lamb, 23 per cent, of our butter and 45 per cent, of our mutton. "(2) To-day Great Britain imports 80 per cent, of her wheat and flour, 60 per cent, of her meat, 80 per cent, of her cheese and 89 per cent, of her butter. Consequently, Great Britain is the only great market available for the absorption cf our produce not consumed locally. "(3) As international trade is only a form of barter, our exports to Great Britain must be paid for by goods purchased by us from Great Britain. Balancing inflow. "The farming community of New Zealand is strongly opposed to any form of protective restrictions on its exports to Great Britain, consequently it just as strongly supports a balancing inflow of imports from Britain. This can best be accomplished by a gradual reduction in tariff rates on Britishmade goods until they finally disappear. "Furthermore, the index cost of manufacture in Great Britain for 1932 was 9.5 (Base 1913-10) whereas the same index for New Zealand was 132.7. Provided tariff rates are reduced or abolished, it is clear that the consuming public of New Zealand cannot afford to pay for locally manufactured goods in preference to imported. "It is a matter of historic truth that when the farming industries have been prospei'ous, New Zealand as a whole has been prosperous, and that when world prices have not. favoured the farming industries New Zealand as a Avhole has suffered. New Zealand has no-products readily saleable in the world's markets other than her primary produce, and to restrict her production of these would mean ruination to the farming community, which for two or three years has merely existed on extra production, it is evident, therefore, that New Zealand must export her surplus produce. How is this produce to be paid for? If we show we are in earnest about purchasing British goods, there will be little talk of quotas or other restrictions on farm output."

Export prices. 4 Farm pastoral and l T ear. expenditure. dairy produce 1927 1574 1396 1928 1642 1553 1929 1636 1492 1930 1628 1168 1931 1490 881 ' 1932 1250 870