Managed Meat Export Wanted

Press, Volume CIII, Issue 30442, 16 May 1964, Page 1

Managed Meat Export Wanted

Unless the New Zealand meat industry wants some form of export marketing control forced on it, serious consideration should be given to the idea of voluntarily forming a co-opera-tive marketing organisation which still retains the flexibility

and competition of free trading, according to Mr P. S,

Plummer.

Mr Plummer, who is Dominion vice-president of Federated Farmers, put his views yesterday to the annual conference of the North Canterbury agricultural section of Federated Farmers.

The pattern of trade was changing and as many countries obtained a better standard of living the over-all world consumption of meat was rising, Mr Plummer said.

Many countries with high living standards were pursuing, to some degree, policies of agricultural protectionism, designed to boost and protect their own agriculture. Managed Markets

“Out of these policies—and along with them —has come the trend towards managed markets and world commodity control,” Mr Plummer said. The main advocates of these policies had been the countries which, by subsidising their own agriculture, had created surpluses of various commodities.

“Also many of the underdeveloped countries have strongly, and at times vociferously, supported any move towards world commodity control of foodstuffs. Through such policies they saw an opportunity of obtaining for themselves supplies of cheap surplus foods,” Mr Plummer said.

So far, New Zealand had been able to sell all it could

produce at reasonably good prices. But there was now a controlled or managed market for New Zealand’s butter in the United Kingdom. There was also a beef agreement with the United States. This appeared to be “quite a good deal” from New Zealand’s point of view and Mr Plummer said his opinion was strengthened by the strong objections at present being raised by the American cattlemen. “May Divert Beef” However, from New Zealand’s point of view, this could be the thin end of the wedge. “The time may come, when, to keep within our quota limits, we will have to divert beef from the United States markets to other outlets.” There had already been discussions with Britain—at its request—on controlling imported meat to the English market. “This would inevitably mean some form of quota on our imports of lamb,” Mr Plummer said. “I believe that some time in the future we are going to have some form of quota on the United Kingdom market, even if it does not come immediately after the present agreement runs out in 1967.” Although the recent discussion on this topic ended without agreement, he said he was “fairly certain” it would be re-opened after the British General Election, irrespective of which party was in power.

Now was the time, Mr Plummer said, for New Zealand meat producers and the meat industry generally, to take stock of the situation of this changing pattern of trade. “New Zealand is about equal with the Argentine as the world’s biggest meat exporter. In 1962 it was the biggest exporter and this could be the case again this year.” In the 1962-63 exporting year New Zealand exported 503,000 tons of meat, includ-

ing 356,000 tons of mutton and lamb. Australia’s mutton and lamb exports in the same period were 81,000 tons and the Argentine’s 36,000, he said. The value of the meat and meat by-products exports from New Zealand was 33.5 per cent of the total exports, wool making up 35 per cent and dairy produce 24.5 per cent, while other exports amounted to only 7 per cent. The meat exports realised £ll9m. of the total export earnings of £356.3m.

“How that trade is controlled in the future in the best interests of the country and producer is of vital importance to us all,” Mr Plummer said.

Once a limitation of supply was brought about at the marketing end, then it became necessary for someone to regulate the exports in this country. One of the major factors in having a regulating organisation was that of retaining, within the framework of managed markets, freedom of

trade and competition. Mr Plummer believed this could be achieved by agreement and co-operatiqn among the growers, freezing companies, export and trading interests and the Meat Board.

Because of the complexities of marketing meat, Mr Plummer thought it would be better to leave the marketing in the hands of the present traders rather than with one marketing organisation, if and when it became necessary to form a regulating organisation for meat exports. Under such a scheme, the Meat Board would have to play a very important part and he thought this could be done under the board’s present statutory powers. “Do not think I am advocating any 1 panic action,” he said, “but I feel we should be prepared for a change and have a flexible plan ready should the occasion arise when it is needed. If we do not formulate some scheme, we will have one forced upon us by someone else.”