EMBARGO ON LIVE STOCK

Press, Volume LXXII, Issue 21908, 8 October 1936, Page 12

EMBARGO ON LIVE STOCK

Commerce Conference Urges Removal

INVESTIGATION TO BE MADE

MINISTER’S ANSWER TO

representations

[THE PEESS Special Service.]

WELLINGTON, October 7,

“An investigation will be made, and the Government will then make a decision, I am not going to say we will lift the embargo; but we are anxious to do the right thing, both with the Old Country and with our own people,” said the Minister for Agriculture (the Hon. W. Lee Martin), addressing the congress of the Feneration of Chambers of Commerce of the British Empire to-day, when the congress was considering a remit from the Grimsby Chamber of Commerce, moved by Sir Albert Atkey, asking the New Zealand Government to reconsider and, if it thought fit, remove the embargo on direct imports to New Zealand of live stock from the United Kingdom. . , , . . Mr Lee Martin said, he thought it could be said that the Government would take the necessary steps to have an investigation made, and, if the position warranted it. he thought he could say definitely that the embargo would be removed. “But we have to be satisfied that, in removing the embargo, we are doing the right thing,” the Minister continued. The Government had been in office for only nine months. It had had a lot of important legislation to deal with, and had not had the opportunity of dealing with this question. He had no doubt that it was, in some parts of Britain, a burning question. Sir Albert Atkey knew, of course, of the difficulties that presented themselves when they were dealing with a very solid objection from some section of the community. New Zealand was particularly a dairying community, Mr Lee Martin continued, although it did export beef, lamb, and mutton; and there was a very strong feeling among the farmers of this Dominion that the embargo should not be removed. He thought he was right in saying that last year, when the Rt. Hon. G. W. Forbes and the Rt. Hon. J. G. Coates went Home to attend a conference, it was decided that the embargo should be removed; but the pressure from inside was so great that the then Minister for Agriculture was afraid to face the position, and the embargo was not removed. The present Government had not had time to deal with the question. The Minister for Finance (the Hon. W. Nash) would be leaving on Sunday for London, and he would make a full investigation into the whole position. The department had supplied Mr Nash with the information it had available, and Mr Lee Martin did not hesitate to say that his officers were strongly in favour of the lifting of the embargo. “But experts make mistakes sometimes, you know,” he added. “They are nbt always right. Some of us know that to our sorrow. Anyway, an investigation will be made, and the Government then will make a decision on the question. I am not going to say we wm lift the Embargo; but we are anxious to do the right thing, both with the Old Country and with our own people.” Government’s Duty Mr Lee Martin added that he did not know that the lifting of the embargo would make a great deal of difference. He did not think that there was much to be said for the influence that the lifting of the embargo would have on trade. New Zealand was anxious to do the right thing; but the Government wanted to be sure that if it lifted the embargo it would not be doing something that would open the door, for if foot-and-mouth disease got into this country it would sweep right through it. Another point that had to be remembered was that they had been particularly free from disease. The farmers felt that it was the bounden duty of the Government to protect their interests and see that there was no possible chance of foot-and-mouth disease entering the country.

Grimsby’s remit was; “That in the interests of progressive trade with New Zealand, this Congress is of the unanimous opinion that the Government of New Zealand be asked to reconsider, and, if thought fit. remove the embargo imposed in 1923 on direct exports to New Zealand ‘of live stock from the United Kingdom.”

Case for Removal of Embargo

Moving the remit before the address by the Minister, Sir Albert Atkey said he had no doubt Mr Lee Martin was endowed with more than ordinary ability, or else he would not be holding the position he occupied. Sir Albert thought, however, that the Minister’s ability was going to be taxed to the very limit to prove to the Congress that what was good-and safe and admitted in every other part of the Empire was not good enough for New Zealand.

“I understand,’” continued Sir Albert Atkey, “that the embargo was imposed in the first place because of a fear that foot-and-mouth disease might be introduced into this country. Well, it never has been introduced, and the agriculturists of England think that idea is a false alarm. They think the precautions taken by the British Ministry of Agriculture should be sufficient. Animals could come into New Zealand by making a detour through Australia and resting there for a while, and costing the importer another £50.”

“Welh of course, governments will always nave a considerable volume of opinion against everything and anything they want to do,” said Sir Albert. “I want the Minister to put in the scales the very strong feeling which exists among the farmers of England and among the farmers of New Zealand who want to import pedigree stock. I want him to take into consideration also the strong feeling that exists among his own Government experts. I really can’t find any strong feeling against the raising of the embargo.” Sir Albert Atkey was applauded as he sat down.

Seconding the motion, Mr C. A. L Treadwell (Hong Kong) said he hoped the Government would be seized with the fact that if the onus of proof lay on the British exporters it had been adequately discharged. Scientific research had showh that the period of incubation of foot-and-mouth disease was from two to four days, and not longer.

Mr Treadwell outlined the steps taken before stock was exported from Britain. In New Zealand they had never had foot-and-mouth diseasebut he was instructed that it could be introduced by other means than by stock.

After the address by Mr Lee Martin, Lord Elibank, president of the Congress, suggested that they should accept without further discussion the Minister’s statement that the Government -was giving the question most