MARKETING OF N.Z. MEAT

Press, Volume XC, Issue 27402, 15 July 1954, Page 12

MARKETING OF N.Z. MEAT

EXPORT CONTROL BILL DELAYED MINISTERIAL REPLIES TO QUESTIONS (W«w Zealand Press Association) WELLINGTON, July 14. In view of the developments taking place in Britain and the early return to free marketing of New Zealand meat it had been considered by the Government inadvisable to proceed with the Meat Export Control Bill at present said the Minister of Agriculture (Mr K. J. Holyoake) in a written reply to Mr P. Kearins (Opposition, WaimarinG; in the House of Representatives today. The Minister said that the New Zealand Meat Producers’ Board would pay close attention, to the trend of marketing procedure during the next year, and if it was found that further protection was required the proposed bill would be reconsidered in time for the 1955 session. The major variations allowed for in the Meat Export Control Bill provided for the purchase of premises and the establishment by the board of a meat distribution organisation in Britain, continued the Minister During the last 12 months three major freeing companies in New Zealand had completed their arrangements for the purchase and establishment of a combined selling agency in Britain, and it was expected that that organisation would provide for the continuance of an open door killing policy. In addition, it was expected that arrangements would be made whereby certain co-operative interests in New Zealand would be enabled to have stock processed and shipped on their own account. It was desirable to study the operations of those organisations before determining what further steps, if any, were essential to protect the -interests of livestock producers in the Dominion concluded the Minister. Mr Kearins, discussing the reply, said there was no doubt that the farming community and the meat exporters were very concerned over the outlook for the coming export season. One Smithfield market operator had been in New Zealand with the intention of purchasing 1,000,000 lamb carcases, but had left without a contract. Some farmers felt that the meat trade should be in the industry’s hands, just as the dairy products export trade was. Mr Kearins said he was wondering whether the Government was dropping the farmers. Mr J. S. Stewart .Opposition, Arch Hill): The farmers are dropping them. Mr Kearins: And the Government is cropping its farmer members. Government voices: What about you? Mr Kearins said that the Govern- _ ment had given one section of the farming community the power to keep a check on its export prices, but had denied another section—the meat producers—the same right to see that they were obtaining the ruling market rates for the oncoming season. Mr S. W. Smith, Parliamentary Under-Secretary to the Minister of Agriculture, said it was true that in the present Meat Act there was some doubt whether the board could trade. Now that the marketing change had come the board required every selling avenue in Britain. If it were found that it was not getting a fair deal or that the board needed some other organisation to check prices, then the whole matter could be- reconsidered in the New Year. Mr C. L. Carr (Opposition, Timam): Too many Vestey-ea interests. Hi?h Commissioner in London The appointment of a successor to the late Sir Frederick Doidge as New Zealand High Commissioner in Lon-, don, was under consideration by the Government, but no decision had yet been taken, said the Minister of External Affairs <Mr T. C. Webb). In the Minister’s written reply to a question asked previously by Mr A. H. Nordmeyer (Opposition, Brooklyn) he said that in the meantime Mr R. M. Campbell, the Official Secretary, had been given the status of Acting-High Commissioner. Road Patrols Criticising as retrograde the policy of operating plainclothes traffic officers, Mr M. Moohan (Opposition, Petone) said that the Government was treating the motorist as a criminal. Mr Moohan's criticism, made during discussion of a written reply by the Minister of Transport (Mr W. S. Goosman) to a question asked by Mr E. H. Halstead (Government, Tamaki) was not supported by Government Mr Goosmun in his reply said the growth of motor traffic and further Jnprovrrnent in road safety were contmuquyy taken Into account in degjmng adequacy of traffic wwnUng uniformed officers, the

Transport Department had been competent for years, Mr Moohan said. Now the Minister was increasing the staff, but these extra men were not going into uniform. The police had a plain-clothes branch, but that was to track down criminals. It was not right to place the motorist in the criminal category. Defending the introduction of the plain-clothes men, Mr H. Johnstone (Government, Raglan) said they might be called snoopers, but they saved lives. Mr J. K. McAlpine (Government, Selwyn) said he hoped the system would be extended to include women observers travelling as passengers. These officers were not snoopers, he said. They did not prosecute. Parliamentary Broadcasts Experiments were being made to eliminate operational difficulties in a proposal to use relay lines to carry Parliamentary broadcasts to listeners in the South Island, said the Minister in charge of Broadcasting (Mr R. M. Algie) to a question asked previously by Mr P. G. Connolly (Opposition, Dimedin Central). Discussing the reply, Mr Connolly said the same reply had been given 10 months ago. The answer would irritate the people in the South Island, he added. “Doesn’t the Government want the South Island to hear what is going on in Wellington?” he asked. “Is this the Holland blind drawn across Cook Strait?” Interference came mainly from Australian stations, he said, and the Government should take the initiative by calling a conference with Australian authorities.

Mr G. R. Herron (Government, Awarua), who shared Mr Connolly’s view that southern listeners were not getting as good a radio service as those in the north, said those responsible for the present tests should be told to hurry up. Mr J. A. Roy (Government, Clutha) expressed a similar view. State Tourist Hotels

One of the problems the Government faced with its tourist hotels was that they were losing substantially, and consideration would have to be given to ways of recouping those losses, said Mr H. R. Lake (Government, Lyttelton). He was discussing the written reply of the Minister in charge of Tourist and Health Resorts (Mr J. R. Marshall) to Mr W. W. Freer (Opposition. Mount Albert), in which the Minister said no offers had been made to sell all or part of the Tourist Department’s chain of hotels and tourist hotels throughout the country. Mr Lake said that the sooner private enterprise took control of the tourist hotels, the better it would be for the tourist industry. One answer to offset the losses was to increase hotel tariffs. The tourist industry could not be expanded unless there was sufficient first-class accommodation for the traffic offering. Last year tourists to New Zealand spent more than £1,000,000, but New Zealanders touring overseas spent between £2,000,000 and £3,000,000.

Mr D. J. Eyre (Government. North Shore) said the tourist hotels had been a headache to former governments as well. He considered the Treasury Department was being too hard on the hotels, in expecting them to repay interest charges as well as show profits. Mr Freer said the managements of the tourist hotels should be given more authority rather directed from Wellington, particularly when urgent decisions had to be made. The hotels should also be permitted to buy on local markets where possible, instead of incurring expense through the transporting of goods from, for instance, Wellington to Wairakei.

PARLIAMENTARY DAY (From Our Parliamentary Reporter) WELLINGTON, July 14. The Address-in-Reply debate will end tomorrow. This afternoon in the House of Representatives was devoted to discussion of Ministerial answers to questions. This evening there was a procession of five Government speakers in the Address-in-Reply debate, and thqp the Deputy-Leader of the Opposition (Mr C. F. Skinner) summed up for the Opposition. The Senior Opposition Whip (Mr J. B. F. Cotterill) moved an extension of time for Mr Skinner, but the Minister of Labour (Mr W. Sullivan) objected, and the Senior Government Whip (Mr A. S.

Sutherland) said there had been an agreement that no extensions would be granted. The Deputy Prime Minister (Mr K. J. Holyoake) filled in time until the adjournment at 10.30 p.m.

When the House resumes at 2.30 p.m. tomorrow afternoon it is likely that Mr J. K. McAlpine (Government, Selwyn) will reply to the debate. Tomorrow evening there will be a apeclal debate on the Roxburgh hydroelectric scheme.