PURCHASE AND SALE OF N.Z. MEAT

Press, Volume LXXVI, Issue 22919, 16 January 1940, Page 5

PURCHASE AND SALE OF N.Z. MEAT

TO THE EDITOR O? I'OT PRESS. Sir, —As recently published, retail prices have now been fixed for, imported meat at Home. First, there was a minimum guarantee to the British farmer of lOd per lb for mutton—plain mutton. Keeping all figures in sterling, the New Zealand meat commandeer followed, with mutton for the duration at rather less than 2;{d for “over and unders” and wether mutton a little more. War events causing a rise in costs, the British farmer was then granted an increase on his guaranteed minimum to lljd, and the last phase is now this fixed price for New Zealand mutton over the counter in Britain at 12d per lb. Lamb and wool (the latter for re-export) are similarly dealt with, and on the same basis of price spread between producer and consumer. Export costs, including war risks from New Zealand, the British Government pays lor; import costs Con return goods) and war risks from Britain, New Zealand pays for. Wartime exports from Britain at considerably advanced prices the British manufacturer is beihg urged to increase by every possible means in his power, to be purchased in New Zealand —let us say out of the wartime profits from fattening and selling mutton at per lb.

There was the natural anxiety of the .British Government to cut commandeer prices to the bone and avoid any profiteering—a quite commendable proceeding. Now there is the selling of this meat at a gross profit of more than 400 per cent. —not so commendable, though entirely Britain’s concern. But consciously to diminish our annual supply of needed sterling to meet in- ' creasing (very much increasing) sterling prices for vitally necessary imports is definitely New Zealand’s concern; particularly is this so for sterling to meet oversea obligations for interest and for sterling allotments for oversea payments to troops and for repayment of principal on overdue loans for the first time in New Zealand’s history, as insisted on in the terms for renewal in London. Now there seems to be a main axiomatic truth here in danger of being overlooked: that anything that emanates from an arbitrarily imposed situa-r tion such as now exists between payment of sterling by Britain for what she buys and receipt of sterling by New- Zealand for what she sells, and adversely affecting the fundamental welfare of either party, and so diminishing its ability to put forth all its strength at this time of common danger and crisis, is of very vital and equal concern to both. With regard to New Zealand, it 1 seems the position is settling into more than a temporary ejnbarrassment. The conditions adverse to its welfare have already arrived and are threatening to become nearly a major disaster. Can there be any virtue in hiding or glossing over these things?— Yours, etc., Y. T. SHAND. January 14, 1940.