RATIONING OF BUTTER

Press, Volume LXXXV, Issue 25810, 23 May 1949, Page 6

RATIONING OF BUTTER

Abolition Sought By Mr A. Linton PROPOSAL CRITICISED BY MR FRASER (New Zealand Press Association.) WELLINGTON, May 22. “If Mr Linton was correctly reported in his address to Federated Farmers at Masterton, he has incurred a very grave responsibility m urging that the rationing of butter in New Zealand should be abolished, said the Prime Minister (Mr Fraser) in a statement- to-night. “I hope he did not advocate that, course,” Mr Fraser said. “If he has done so. then he cannot be in possession of the facts of the food situation in Britain. During my recent brief visit to the United Kingdom 1 asked for one appointment of gr^aimportance. It'was with Mr John Strachey. Minister of Food, and his chief officers. I felt it was my responsibility to ascertain the actual position of the people of Britain in regard to butter and other food fats, so that I could estimate the need for continuing butter-rationing here tc help out their meagre food. "Mr Strachey explained to me that at present the butter ration was three ounces, margarine four ounces, other fats two ounces —nine ounces in all, Mr Fraser said. “He said that he appreciated very highly the assistance New Zealand is giving the people of Britain through butter rationing here, and natyrally hoped that it would be continued, particularly in view of the fact that the meat ration had been so very much reduced. It is obvious, that if rationing was cancelled in New Zealand, it would be difficult to retain it in Australia and most probably alsb in Denmark. "It has been estimated that if we abandoned rationing, Britain’s supplies would be cut by some 14,000 tons, and similar possible action »n Australia would mean a loss to Britain of 40,000 tons,” Mr Fraser said. "The last season in New Zealand has been exceptionally good for but-ter-fat production. Gradings for butter are already more than 12.000 tons greater than for the corresponding period of nine months last year. It would be tragic if this bounteous season, and the splendid efforts of the farmers resulted in less rather than more for the British people. That is what the abandonment of rationing would mean.” •

STATEMENT BY MR LINTON (New Zealand Press Association.) MASTERTON. May 21. *T think the time has arrived when the Government should abolish the rationing of butter.” said the deputychairman of the New Zealand Dairy Board (Mr A. Lrinton) to-day. "In conjunction with the abolition of rationing, the subsidy ftom the Consolidated Fund on the sale of butter in New Zealand should also be dis* continued. "The price ol butter sold locally.” said Mr Linton, "should be in line with its production cost, and if that were done, butter would, to some extent, ration itself, and would be no need for the continuance of official rationing. In my opinion, there is an urgent need for a review of the whole position.

“Together with New Zealand’s increase in production of butter this season, there is every prospect of increased supplies to the United Kingdom from European countries and a large increase in milk production in England,” said Mr Linton. “In these circumstances, the people of New Zealand are entitled to consideration. They should, however, be asked to pay the true value of butter—that is its cost of production. The wage standards in New Zealand have been substantially increased, and it is obviously wrong for butter to be sold considerably below its cost of production and the taxpayer is finding more than £1,000,000 a year to keep the price at the present level.”