No levy reduction on lamb for U.K.

Press, Volume CXVI, Issue 34131, 19 April 1976, Page 2

No levy reduction on lamb for U.K.

(N.Z.P.A. Staff Correspondent) LONDON. New Zealand lamb producers will not get the reduction or stoppage of the costly levy 7 the Common Market charges on their exports to Britain that they have been praying for.

This seems clear from talks the Prime Minister (Mr Muldoon) has had with the British Agriculture Minister (Mr Fred Peart). Last year Mr Peart promised to take up the levy question with the Common Market “as a matter of urgency.” Though many months have passed nothing has happened and Mr Peart has told Mr Muldoon it would be “extraordinarily difficult” to do anything about the levy. Mr Peart had promised to try to get the levy reduced when it was a rate of 12 per cent. Last January 1, it went up to 16 per cent and its effect currently costs New Zealand producers the equivalent of s2sm a vear. Next year, it will rise to its full level of 20 per cent —the Common Market’s normal external tariff- At that figure, it will cost New Zealand lambgrowers, who have to carry the burden, s4om annually. LOST CAUSE Mr Muldoon did not elaborate on Mr Peart’s comment. But it has been, clear for some time to those close to Brussels developments that a reduction or stopping of the increasing levy is a lost cause. It never seemed likely that the Common Market would take the precedent of changing what is part of its common tariff structure. Mr Peart had appeared to recognise this, by not pressing for a reduction in the Council of Ministers although he had given New Zealand a promise that he would do so. As a consolation, Mr Peart told Mr Muldoon that Britain would continue to argue against a Common Market sheepmeat regulation, which would govern prices and import and export trade in lamb, including New Zealand’s 230,000 tonnes a year sales to Britain. The E.E.C. is committed to having a regulation, but only Ireland — desperate to get a bigger share of the highpriced French market — is really interested at this stage. Last week, the Irish repeated their call for a regulation and demanded price

quantity restrictions against New Zealand exports. Mr Muldoon received better pews from Mr Peart about butter. Britain would hold out against any review clause on New Zealand’s butter quotas to the United Kingdom for 1978-80, which should be settled by E.E.C. Agriculture Ministers in Brussels next month, Mr Peart told him. - REVIEW CLAUSE The Netherlands and Denmark have made it clear that they will insist on a review clause — allowing New Zealand’s set and approved quotas to be reduced whenever Consumption in Britain falls. Mr Peart apparently indi-

cated to Mr Muldoon that he would veto any decision by his colleagues if it included a review clause. "A decision with a review clause would not be a decision,” Mr Muldoon said, “and Mr Peart agrees with that.” If Mr Peart uses his powers of veto, which is rarely done in E.E.C. council meetings, it could precipitate a crisis. But New Zealand has always insisted that its arrangements must be firm and that a review clause, depriving the dairy industry of the confidence necessary for forward planning, would be totally against all commitments the Common Market has made.