RELAXATION SUPPORTED

Press, Volume XCI, Issue 27698, 30 June 1955, Page 14

RELAXATION SUPPORTED

LOSSES ON TRUST OPERATIONS MASTERTON OFFICIALS’ EVIDENCE (New Zealand Press Association) WELLINGTON, June 29. The Masterton Licensing Trust’s losses on accommodation in its two hotels, the Empire and the Midland, reached the •staggering” total of £31.082 in the year ended March 31. 1954. according to submissions made by the trust to the Price Tribunal . today. I The trust was supporting the application for removal of price control from the sales of liquor and from tariffs in licensed hotels. For the trust, Mr A. A. Matthews said that it had had to bear out of the liquor sales profits the losses on the accommodation side, and under . the present system of price control this was not possible. Mr. Matthews said that a sixpenny 9oz glass of beer cost the trust 'io and the bottle store trade was the most profitable part of the trust’s business. “The Masterton Licensing Trust is ‘ supporting this application to remove price control from both the sale of liquor and the provision of accommodation because it is deeply concerned with its own experience of the adverse effect which price fixation has had on its operations.” Mr Matthews said.

The trust had had to build, provide, and maintain on present-day market costs, and it thought its losses on the accommodation side would be more pronounced than the common experience in New Zealand, he said. This was because of the standards the trust was determined to follow. Once the initial stages were past, the trust was confident it would operate as a sound economic unit. The trust’s trading results showed a net profit of £7985 in 1950, £7640 in 1951, £3446 in 1952, and £3354 in 1953, and a net loss of £12.879 in 1954, said Mr Matthews. In its reports to Parliament, the trust has emphasised the need for a wide and urgent consideration of hotel tariffs and existing controls. After mentioning the 1954 loss of £31.082 on the two accommodation hotels, Mr Matthews said it was wrong in principle to bear out of profits from liquor sales the losses on the accommodation side.

"“There is no reason why those who drink—by far the greatest majority of whom are local people—shou t heavilv subsidise the traveller,” he said. “To that extent, the local people for whose benefit the trust was established pay more than would be necessary if price control were lifted.” The position was deteriorating bedecline in the prices of •, “led spirits, most of which were ' .£? rom control, Mr Matthews said. ; T . he . experience of the Masterton I Licensing Trust,” he said, “shows that. lin respect of that body, price control i has not succeeded, has acted adversely to the interest of the public weli- , demg- and cannot hope to operate successfully in the future to place the trust in the position of the sound economic unit which it has been dethe P«>P’e and Gover nment of this country.” The secretary-manager of the Masterton Licensing Trust (Mr C. Crawc°st of selling beer in the bars had been analysed. A nine2Vff e ,5 la , ss cost the trust Eid for the beer. 2d for wages, and id tor other expenses—a total of 7d. This beer was sold for 6d