N.Z. MEAT FOR BRITAIN

Press, Volume LXXXVIII, Issue 26855, 7 October 1952, Page 8

N.Z. MEAT FOR BRITAIN

POSSIBLE DIVERSION TO EUROPE FARMER URGES INQUIRY BY BOARD (New Zealand Press Association) WELLINGTON, October 6. A suggestion that New Zealand lamb and beef were being resold by Britain to feed the people of ration-free nations was made today by Mr W. J. Lusty, a member of the Auckland Harbour Board, the Raglan County Council, and other local bodies, when he arrived in Wellington in the Rangit0 Mr Lusty said that he had seen about 600 tons of prime New Zealand lamb, pork, and beef being-unloaded at ports in the West Indies and the Bermudas. There was reason to believe, he said, that the balance of that cargo was later sent to the Contment of Europe. „ , , The prices paid to New Zealand Producers were well below those paid by Britain to other countries, he added, and he questioned whether the sacrifices of the Dominion’s farmers were going towards the alleviation of the distress of Britain, qt whether a large Kart of their produce was merely eing used to improve the dollar position and feed the nations of Europe. “If this meat is being resold, who is getting the difference in the value — the Imperial authorities or New Zealand?” Mr Lusty asked. He said he saw 100 tons of New Zealand beef and mutton transhipped to an American luxury tourist liner at Nassau. “Britain is desperate for meat, and anything that the New Zealand producer can do to increase this quantity would be greatly appreciated by the general consumer in Britain,” he said. “The price paid to the British farmer seems fantastic compared with the price received by the New Zealand farmer. Any increase in prices arranged for the next season should be paid in full to the New Zealand producer, and so help to stimulate increased production for shipment to the Mother Country. Subsidies in Britain “In most cases the British farmer receives almost three times the amount paid out to the New Zealand producer. In addition to this, he receives extensive subsidies up to about 30 per cent, on phosphates and from £5 to £lO an acre for ploughing for crops. He also receives a subsidy for breeding ewes on hill country of up to 7s 6d a ewe, and extensive grants for general improvement of farms, particularly on the marginal country, extending at times up to 50 per cent. Of the cost of improvements as approved by the Minister of Agriculture. These include improvements to farm buildings, the making of roads, the clearing of fern and second growth, the laying-on of water, and various other things which will be the means of increasing production.” As a result Britain had increased her production. Today she. was producing 40 per cent, or more of hgr total requirements. “As a farmer, I am alarmed to think that the New Zealand Government has withdrawn all subsidies, including the most important one on phosphates,” he said. “This is the very quickest and most important means of increasing production, especially on hill country and marginal lands. “I visited butchers’ shops in all parts of Britaip, and I found New Zealand lamb and beef regarded very highly indeed,” he added. “On visiting the shops I was immediately assailed by the question, ‘Where is your New Zealand lamb?’ I replied that New Zealand had sent 12,000,000 lambs last year. ‘Well, where is it?’ they asked. ‘We hardly ever see New Zealand lamb, and when we do we get very little of it.’ ” Mr Lusty said he hoped that the Meat Board would look ihto the question of whether these resales of New Zealand meats were taking place extensively, and whether the people of Britain/were getting the full benefit of New Zealand’s production effort.

Comment by Meat Board The general manager of the New Zealand Meat Producers’ Board (Mr J J. Evans) said tonight that any such transhipments of New 1 Zealand meat as described by Mr Lusty would be done only on the decision of the United Kingdom Ministry of Food. Mr Evans had no further comment to make.