The Press FRIDAY, AUGUST 31, 1934. Meat Exports

Press, Volume LXX, Issue 21257, 31 August 1934, Page 10

The Press FRIDAY, AUGUST 31, 1934. Meat Exports

In his annual address to the New Zealand Meat Producers' Board in Wellington yesterday, the chairman, Mr David Jones, said as much to illuminate the present negotiations with the British Government as could be said, perhaps, without specific reference to the recent communications of both sides, which (Mr Coates indicates) remain confidential by the British Government's desire. The most interesting points in Mr Jones's speech appear in his remarks on Mr Elliot's levy proposal, on the bacon and pork exports, and on the possibility of disposing of, New Zealand primary produce by direct exchange with foreign countries, goods for goods. Mr Jones observes that the principle agreed on at Ottawa was that the British price level should be raised by import restriction, and he is careful and .right to draw attention to the benefit which New Zealand meat producers derived from the exclusion of large quantities of Argentine and Continental meat. He goes on, however, to say that market control by levy as well as by quantitative restriction, as recommended by the British Fat Stock Commission and desired by Mr Elliot, would be "a complete reversal ~f the policy •' agreed to at Ottawa." A levy would not " raise the price level " that is, to the Dominion producer—but would provide a fund to supplement the prices received by the British producer. A few figures would be useful; but Mr Jones, is able to say only that " it would ap- " pear" that the amount of levy New Zealand would have to pay would exceed the total value of the beef export. There is force in all this; but it ought to be remembered that the British Government is no longer bound by the agreement in regulating quantities, though unable to impose a levy without consent till 1937. It is therefore hardly out of order in proposing new terms and even a new principle of control. It is also to be borne in mind that a great deal depends on the extent of the Dominion preference granted, if the levy is I introduced. It is understood that the | wording of the British Government's ' tragic agreement with Argentina unI de:. jnedly connects and compels pro rata reduction in "all" New Zealand " meat" exports with reduction in Argentinian exports to Great Britain, and that this is the technical cause of the threat to New Zealand's expanding pork and bacon shipments. If so, and if the Argentine Government stands stiffly to the letter of the clause, the question of preference may become a crucial one in the debate and in the result. The rapid recent expansion in New Zealand's pork exports makes it obvious that a sudden check here and the fixing of a lower limit would seriously injure farmers, especially dairy farmers, who can stand further injury least; but the undertaking quoted in Mr Coates's letter to Mr i Baldwin is of course too general as | well as too out of date to be ap- j pealed to. The sudden move to i withdraw New Zealand baconer pigs from the British bacon scheme and ;

oring thorn under the meat quota scheme raises a different and better argument; and the issue of the forthcoming conference in London must, as Mr Jones says, be watched " with keen anxiety." As for the suggestion that the Government should pursue every chance of arranging barter contracts with foreign countries, especially those that yell New Zealand more than they" buy. it is a wise one and will no doubt be adopted. What success would be met with only trial can show; but it is plain that contracts sufficient to absorb at a reasonable price surpluses on hand after filling the British quotas "-oulxl make the scheme a complete success, and these surpluses will not be huge.