Mr Nordmeyer’s Letter On Aluminium Imports

Press, Volume CI, Issue 29747, 14 February 1962, Page 14

Mr Nordmeyer’s Letter On Aluminium Imports

( N.Z. Press Association)

WELLINGTON, February 13.

The Minister of Industries and Commerce (Mr Marshall) today released the text of a letter which, he said, the Minister of Finance in the Labour Government (Mr Nordmeyer) was believed to have written on April 10,1959, to Aluminium, Ltd., of Canada.

The text is:— “As I have already informed you, the Government feels that in view of the possibility, however remote, that an aluminium smelter may be built in New Zealand, your firm is entitled to an assurance that for a reasonable period it may purchase its supplies of aluminium ingots from the parent company. ’’This letter will confirm our conversation that your full requirements of aluminium ingots may be imported from the parent company, at not more than world prices, for a period of 10 years from the time the manufacturing company begins to use such ingots. And that for a further period of five years the manufacturing company should have the right to import half of the annual requirements of the New Zealand factory. “It is understood that thereafter such imports will be a subject for discussion between the Government, your factory and any smelter established in New Zealand.” “No Carbon Copy” Mr Marshall said no carbon copy of this letter eould be found on' the files of the Treasury or of the Department of Industries and Commerce. “The existence of this letter or of the arrangement was not known to the present Government and a copy of the letter only came to light in October last when Alcan Industries. Ltd., raised the matter, and on request supplied a photostat copy of the letter,” Mr Marshall said. “The agreement with the company, as recently publiebed. is contained in an earlier letter from Mr Nordmeyer, dated February 6 1959. “The Labour Minister of Electricity (Mr Watt) in a statement last Friday said the Alcan agreement was signed by Mr Holloway, then Minister of Industries and Commerce. Not only was this incorrect, but the Industries and Commerce Department had no part in the negotiation of the agreement, and, according to a note on

the file, did not receive a copy of the letter of February 6, 1959, until July 2, 1959.

“The Leader of the Opposition (Mr Nash) in a statement on Friday said he knew the agreement made with Comalco was made to. their complete satisfaction. But it appears that Comalco did not know, and the Labour Government did not disclose to them, that Alcan, the mam user of aluminium ingot in New Zealand, might by arrangement with that Government, or one of its ministers, be importing all its aluminium until 1971 and half of it till 1976. Comalco expects that aluminium will be produced in New Zealand by 1966,” Mr Marshall said. “Mr Watt is also reported as saying that he was not aware of any restrictions in the Alcan agreement that affected the marketing freedom of Comalco. He, therefore, does not know of, or has forgotten, the above letter, or that Mr Nordmeyer had on February 6, 1959, written to Aluminium, Ltd., as follows:

’’ ‘The Government would use its powers and influence to ensure that Aluminium, Ltd., would not face competition which rendered its enterprise uneconomic.’ ” Comalco Agreement

Mr Marshall added: “Yet the agreement with Comalco signed on January 19, 1960. for the use of Manapouri power recites that it was made ‘with a view to utilising such power for the production of metals or other products for sale within New Zealand. . . .’ “Mr Watt says all the Labour ministers were in on

the broad principles of both the Alcan agreement and the Comalco agreement.*’ said Mr Marshall. “Did Mr Nash or Mr Watt disclose to Comalco the arrangements with Alcan? Did they know about these arrangements. Or did Mr Nordmeyer fail to disclose them to anyone?” Mr Marshall asked.

“This is another untidy situation which the last Labour Government has left tor the present Government to straighten out It is not my purpose at this stage to do more than state the problems which have already been the subject of public comment. The solution of these problems must be a matter of further discussions.”