Export Institute gets behind C.E.R.

Press, 14 December 1982, Page 33

Export Institute gets behind C.E.R.

The Export Institute is planning a campaign on closer economic relations with Australia that may revive some of the impetus in promoting exporting. The promotion has dwindled since the peak of Export Year, 1979.

This was the message of an address by Mr Brian Service, national vice-presi-dent of the Export Institute of New Zealand, at a luncheon held yesterday by the institute’s Christchurch branch.

The institute’s campaign plan was likely to be completed by Christmas, and would be released in the New Year, Mr Service said.

A healthy majority of institute members welcomed C.E.R.. said Mr Service, who is the general manager of New Zealand Pharmaceuticals. of Palmerston North, a firm that exports 100 per cent of its production.

“We uelieve that the agreement will work to the benefit of both countries, but that the advantage — if there is any — may well lie with the enterprising New Zealander.

“Assuming for a moment that our consumption of an item is 10.000 units a year and that total Australian consumption is 50,000. it seems to me that we have a greater opportunity, during the gradual reduction of the licensing and tariff barriers, of securing a share of the

Australian markets than thev have of successfully invading ours."

The C.E.R. agreement was likely to provide New Zealanders with a focal point on which to concentrate their efforts, he said.

The experienced Australian exporter was alreadypursuing a share of the large South-East Asian trade but a New Zealand company could quite sensibly double its sales by exporting to Australia. But for an Australian company to double its sales, it would probably be necessary for it to get extra business in Indonesia, the Philippines, or perhaps Malaysia.

“In other words for the enterprising New Zealand manufacturer or grower, who can not only plan boldly but also has the skill and stamina to achieve his plan, there are going to be opportunities for huge growth in Australia.” However, the institute did not imagine that all New Zealand manufacturers and growers would benefit from C.E.R. For those businesses that were “not yet really wide awake” C.E.R. could be a distinct threat rather a than a source of opportunities.

"The gains are most likely to be made by those who are more forward-looking, more receptive to opportunity, and more likely to co-operate in the pursuit of common

goals." The institute believed, that, because of C.E.R.. in three years New Zealand would be a better and more reliable source of supply. Mr Service said. Irrespective of real or imaginary comparative advantages.’ New Zealand manufacturers would leave themselves in a distinctly inferior position if they did not become thoroughly familiar with the more substantial markets in Australia. “Every New Zealand board of directors must see that its chief executive is now in the same game as his Australian counterpart." It would be vital that the chief executives of New Zealand enterprises regularly visit the Australian communities in which they needed to achieve significant market shares. “It will not be enough to send salesmen, or even divisional managers. Only those in a company with the authority to make strategic decisions about the deployment of capital resources will be adequately responsive . .’’ The problem was not simply one of economics, but of commitment, “especially at the top," of awareness of the need for concerted action, and; of enthusiasm for productive work. The institute has about 2000 members, all individuals rather than firms.