Beef trade has its poor relations

Press, Volume CXV, Issue 33878, 25 June 1975, Page 9

Beef trade has its poor relations

(By

LANCE EARLY)

Anomalies frequently develop when the Government or producer boards launch farm-aid Or price support schemes. Four years ago, the dollar-;

a-sheep scheme was ; launched under the name of! the Sheep Retention Scheme.! Basically it was anomalous > iin that its application favoured those farmers with; ! sizable holdings, and drove!; the smaller men to the wall. Then, early this year, the i Government, in an aid; trhomo dpcionpd tn hnnst •

farming,' decided to pay out i a subsidy of a dollar a head on export lamb. It was made' retrospective to October 1. The anomaly quickly came, to light. Farmers who sup-j I plied the local retail markets! I were put at an obvious dis-; ; advantage. No sooner had the situation been pointed out than ■ the Government agreed to pay an extra dollar a. head ito the farmers who, up to ! that time, had supplied the local retail markets. Store sheep vendors also received a payment of 60c a lamb on stock sold between October and January, when the scheme was introduced. Beef anomaly Today the meat industry! is experiencing another anomaly — this time relat-i ing to beef. It occurs with; the decision by the Meat Board to make' suppiemen-' tary payments on export, beef from February 24. This improvement to the export rates drew an influx; of cattle to the killing centres, and for Canterbury and West Coast producers the situation was compounded by the reduced throughput at the Belfast works of the Canterbury Frozen Meat Company, pending the opening of new beef-killing facilities. For years, export prices for lamb and beef have acted as a floor to the local market, but such is not the' case this year with beef. Suppliers of the local markets are, in fact, at a severe disadvantage with those able to get cattle killed for the export trade. Except for good light to medium-weight, steers, cattle sold on the; local market are trailing export prices by anything up ■to S 4 per 1001 b. or 9c a kilogram. The present- beef schedule shows the following prices in dollars per 1001 b. and cents per kilogram, compared with the schedule before the introduction of the Meat Board's supplementary payments: — Chillers, under 4841 b: $l6, 35c fold price, $11.75, 26c).; Chillers. 486ib to 5941 b: $17.25, 38c (old price, $13.50, 29c). Chillers, 5961 b and over: $17.75. 39c (old price, 514.50, 32c). G.A.Q. steers, under 4841 b: ,$15.50, 34c (old price $11.50, 25c). G.A.Q., 4861 b to 5941 b: $16.75, 37c (Old price $12.75, 28c). G.A.Q,, 5961 b and over: $17.25, 38c (old price $13.75, 30c). i On the local market (

i heavy-weight steer beef soldi lat a marked disparity during i the autumn. Regularly it: was changing hands at $l2, per 1001 b (26.5 a kilogram), and no more than $l4 (31c). ; But as the list of prices quoted shows, the producer; who could get his cattle

! killed for export would re- ; ceive $17.25 per 1001 b, or ,j3Bc a kilogram. ’ In round figures, the; heavy steer has been worth; ‘Jabout $25 more when killed J for export than when sold, ’lon the open market. These! I figures were shown in a; comparison made recently of some steers from the South1 bridge district. I From time to time, pro-| ' ducers have been asked, in ' their own interests, not to flood.the local markets — a consistent supply usually 1 ensures consistent prices. ' But even this has been seriously undermined byseveral wholesalers who. in a price-cutting war. cpn- , tinued to depress an already 1 'weak market. , The ready availability of! ' good prime' cattle enabled the wholesalers to fight for ■ a bigger share of the mar- ' ket, but it has not been goodl ■; business for the producers. | I Market influence j ; As well as local companies ' and butchers, a MidI Canterbury group of farmers' ,;has had a distinct influence! jion the market, but price-! .wise their activities have the suburban con-; sumer rather than the farmer-producer. , Of course, the short-cut ’! explanation of the situation , is that it is a case of supply; ’ exceeding demand. [, Now that winter is upon ■ us, cattle fatteners are expecting an upturn in the market, and that with the; ~ approach of October (when J; the. Meat Board wil] lift its j price support still further) "the local market will go; along in sympathy. But until l ;ithe export price again be-' ; I comes the floor price, such Ji reckoning would be wrong. \ Two ways are open to I ' farmers for securing an imyprovement in ■ local beef J! prices. First, vendors, withj lithe co-operation of their stock firms, could restrict J: the flow of cattle to the . market. Some cohesion and .'strong-mindedness in the i farming community could get beef back to $25 per ’ i 1001 b within a fortnight. Canterbury farmers never -.entered a winter with as I; much feed as they have this ‘ year. Producers could there- ■ fore swing the odds in their .favour. ■ Second. the situation ; depends on the ability of the • freezing companies to cope ; with available supplies. •'There is some indication. • that this is being achieved, although there is still a t backlog. |