Move Against Black Marketing

Press, Volume CX, Issue 32392, 3 September 1970, Page 22

Move Against Black Marketing

(From Our Own Reporter)

WELLINGTON, Sept. 2. An appeal to fruiti growers not to raise j arguments against secitions of the new Apple and Pear Marketing Bill, aimed at stamping out black marketing in fruit, was made by the Undersecretary of Agriculture (Mr Dick) at the annual conference yesterday of the Fruitgrowers’ Federation.

Mr Dick said he expected to introduce the bill in Parliament this session. But nothing was more likely to upset the passage of the bill than continued sniping at provisions either in it or not in it. “You have to be realistic

in this world, and learn to compromise,” he said. The main new provision of the bill was to give the board’s inspectors adequate powers. But rights of entry and powers of search were wisely given sparingly by the Government.

Black marketing had been accorded more publicity than it deserved, and the Government had been taken to task for not having given the board the weapons to stamp it out.

But, Mr Dick said, he had not been unduly impressed by such publicity, nor by its employment as ' a tactical measure, if that was the reason for it. The need to stamp out black marketing indicated some lack of grower loyalty and some break-down in industry discipline. “It should not be necessary for someone else to give you a stick to whack your own dog with,” he said. An act of Parliament would not magically wipe out black

marketing. The persons concerned still had to be’caught. However, he did agree that the board had been badly hamstrung in its efforts to enforce the law, and he hoped the provision of the new act would result in tidying up an unsatisfactory state of affairs. Mr Dick said that the Government would be receptive to the abolition of marketing control over apples and pears if the growers felt this had lost its effectiveness.

The marketing of apples and pears and citrus fruits was fairly rigidly controlled. “This was your wish. Nobody forced it on you,” he said.

Growers of sub-tropical fruits had shown considerable initiative in developing markets, and there seemed to be a move towards a more positive organisation. But Mr Dick warned the growers to think carefully before pressing for legislation that would restrict their freedom. Controls and restrictions of

production of primary products were a concept that seemed to be gathering strength. It was a pretty serious thing tq dictate, to a person whether or not he could engage in the occupation of his choice. Licensing of production and growing under quota were anathema to the traditionally independent New Zealander. Where a product had no market outside New Zealand and where the New Zealand market was relatively inflexible, control of production had become accepted. There were controls over the production of hops and tobacco, and the poultry industry was coming under the same sort of production control. , Provided production quotas were freely exchanged, nobody was denied access to the industry of his choice. But where the outlet, domestic or export, was flexible, control of production could be a concession of defeat.