Wool Scheme “Frustrated”

Press, Volume CVII, Issue 31500, 14 October 1967, Page 1

Wool Scheme “Frustrated”

(N.Z Pros Association? AUCKLAND, Oct 13, An Auckland importer, Mr D. K. Duncan, says he is being frustrated in his attempts to sell 3000 bales of stockpiled New Zealand wool to a Russian company because his proposal conflicts with Wool Commission and Government policy. Mr Duncan has had a Ann offer from the Russian ccm-

pany to buy New Zealand wool provided he can obtain a licence to import goods from Russia to a fifth of the value of the wool. He said yesterday that if, he could obtain the licence to Import goods worth $60,000 he would bring in high qua!ity Russian salmon or other fish products for which he was certain there was an unsatisfied demand and a ready sale. . ' Mr Duncan has applied to the Customs Department for a conditional licence and has outlined his proposals in letters to the Minister of Overseas Trade (Mr Marshall), the director of import licensing in the Customs Department (Mr N. W. Laking), and the Permanent Secretary of the Department of Industries and Commerce (Mr M. J. Moriarty). A telegram of reply from Mr Marshall said: “It is not possible to issue additional licences. Your company has no history in this trade and in equity to existing importers I could not agree to special provision being made. I regret your proposal must be declined.” In a reply received this . week, Mr Laking said the arrangement proposed by Mr . Duncan did not conform to 1 present import licensing poii icy which was founded on multi-lateral trading and the need to avoid inequities in the issue of licences.

“Your proposal could only be met,” said Mr Laking. “within the framework of a formula approved by the Government which consider-, ably extended the concessions available .to those who pro l moted exports. “The Government is aware that a body of opinion favours bilateral as opposed to multi-lateral trading and is keeping the question under constant review. “In present conditions, however, I regret that my reply must be unfavourable.” In replies two letters

sent by Mr Duncan to the Wool Commission, the manager of the commission (Mr H. L. M. Peirse) said that the commission’s policy during 1967-68 was to sell no stockpiled wool at below purchase cost. “Although the Wool Commission does not bind itself to any one method of disposal, it favours the auction system,” he said. “It is the commission's present view that it would not consider proposals for direct sale of its stocks unless such proposals were for very large quantities required for above normal consumption in the importing country con-

cerned, and which appeared unlikely to obstruct the return of confidence in the wool trade,” said Mr peirse. Mr Duncan said today he envisaged that the 3000 bales wanted by the Russian-com-pany would earn New Zealand about $lOO a bale or. a total of $300,000 but the exact prices could be negotiated between him and the buyer/ The Prime Minister (Mr Holyoake) said after a meeting With wool industry leaders in Wellington on WednesI day night that no firin offers had been received to buy ■ wool by negotiated contract i from the mounting stockpile - of the Wool Commissjon.