BUTTER QUOTAS Holyoake’s Protest Not Taken Seriously

Press, Volume CII, Issue 30214, 20 August 1963, Page 14

BUTTER QUOTAS Holyoake’s Protest Not Taken Seriously

(Special Correspondent N.Z.P.A.) LONDON, August 19. New Zealand appears a dog in the manger, for although it has no extra butter to supply Britain under increased quotas it resents other countries supplying extra quantities, according to comment in trade circles. The protest by the New Zealand Prime Minister, Mr Holyoake, is discounted as being more for domestic than for British attention in view of the approaching General Election.

Judging by published differences of opinion between the New Zealand and British Governments over the latest increase in butter quotas andreports of criticism by Mr Christopher Soames, the Mihister of Agriculture, of New Zealand’s slowness to reply to British views on the future of the meat trade, relations between the two countries at an official level seem only fair to middling at the moment. The “firm protest” by Mr Holyoake over the butter quotas, which was given some prominence by the more “serious” British newspapers, caused surprise by its astringency. It has drawn editorial comment from "The Times” which, in this instance, seems to reflect the British Government opinion that his protest appears to have little substance.

The leading article repeated, almost word-f Or-word. the comment of a Government spokesman that Mr Holyoake must expect the British Government to protect Britain's interests as a consumer in just the same way that he himself does his best for his own butter producers.

Although opposing views about butter quotas are obvious in Britain, criticisms by Mt Soames of the New Zealand Government’s failure to reply to his Ministry's proposals for a changing trend in meat imports are not widely known. In May, Mr Soames outlined to the House of Commons Britain’s intention to level off both Home production and imports of meat and to hold discussions with Home and overseas suppliers about it. Since then it is known he has made privately some pointed remarks which indicate he is critical of the silence he has encountered from Wellington.

It is reasonable to assume that his remarks have been conveyed to Wellington and that the views he sought are in the course of prep ration Whether there will be any public discussion of them before the New Zealand General Election can only be guessed. It may be that the New Zealand Government, in deliberating over its reply to Mr Soames, is attempting to avoid further entanglement over quotas and thereby avoid a repetition of what

has been happening in the butter market. It would not want two arguments over quotas on its plate. Mr Soames has certainly side-stepped the request for a press interview in order that his criticisms could be confirmed and made known in New Zealand. He is now on holiday. Mr Holyoake’s speech—in which he said that the cords of attachment binding Britain and certain Com-monw-’alth countries had begun to fray and warned of the consequences if Britain becomes inextricably involved in Europe—was given some prominence in newspapers, but it attracted no editorial comment. New Zealand’s concern at Britain’s policy of joining E.E.C.—for the time being a dead duck—'had always been appreciated by the British, yet in some circles there is surprise that the New Zeland Government has not made any very strenuous effort to increase trade links with Europe.

“I am not aware of any particular sense of urgency placed upon us and I am certainly not aware of any recent communication asking tor an early reply,” Mr Holyoake said in Auckland last evening when asked to comment on the above message. “It is sheer coincidence that our economic committee of Cabinet dealt with the question this morning after a lot of preliminary work and after consideration by Ministers of papers over the week-end. “The matter will be on the agenda of my Cabinet tomorrow morning," he said.