Producers seek reassurance at Meat Board meeting

Press, 4 May 1984, Page 8

Producers seek reassurance at Meat Board meeting

Penetrating questioning and much seeking after reassurances on the size of the Meat Industry Stabilisation Account debt marked a “meet the producers” meeting of the Meat Board on Banks Peninsula last week. The board’s deputy chairman, Mr Norman Mcßae, and a board member and Canterbury farmer, Mr Mervyn Barnett, met with 25 members of Banks Peninsula Federated Farmers. The meeting was chaired by the Canterbury and Westland member of the Meat and Wool Boards’ Electoral Committee, Mr George Hobson. A meat processor and exporter, Mr Ces Stevens, also attended. He is the chairman of a consortium set up to market New Zealand lamb cuts in Japan and his companies, C. S. Stevens and Co, Ltd, Ashley Meat Processors and Ashley Meat Exporters, all of Christchurch, participate extensively in the “buy-back” provisions under the Meat Board’s sheepmeats marketing scheme. The meeting was one of more than 50 around New Zealand in recent weeks called by the Meat Board as a means of explaining its centralised selling policies and objectives, and achievements, and answering any questions which producers might have. In Canterbury other meetings with Mr Mcßae were held last week in Darfield, Cust and Culverden and at the last two venues the chairman was the North Canterbury electoral committee member, Mr J. J. McLean. The chairman of the board, Mr Adam Begg, also addressed a meeting earlier in April in Timaru and last Monday in Ashburton. The electoral committee members in these centres are Mr H. B. Styles in Timaru and Mr B. K. Lili in Ashburton. Mr Barnett also spoke early in April in Marlborough, Nelson and West Coast. In addressing the farmers’ meeting at the Hilltop, Banks Peninsula, Mr Mcßae said that the last two years had been probably the most difficult the meat industry -had faced. He believed a reasonably satisfactory situation was

now emerging. The orderly disposal of meat stocks over the last 18 months had been an achievement in the circumstances and by the end of this meat trading year lamb would hopefully be “free of stabilisation.” Supplementary minimum prices would continue to be paid, of course, but the Government was only committed to these for a further year. Much greater co-ordina-tion had been achieved with the appointment of eight importer-agents for sheepmeats in the United Kingdom. Sales volumes were now above targets and an over-all 50c per kilogram price improvement in that .market compared with the same period last year had been achieved. The consortium for the Japanese market would “virtually relaunch” New Zealand lamb cuts early next year and Mr Mcßae predicted annual sales of 50,000 tonnes in Japan in a few years. In defence of Devco, he said that the marketing operation in Canada was perhaps the best New Zealand lamb presentation in the world. It was moving lamb at prices which would probably equate to the S.M.P. level in New Zealand and it was the type of

approach needed in all other markets. Mr Mcßae said the white meat continued to be the major competitor for sheepmeats on world markets and chicken was being placed in Middle Eastern markets at only $B5O to ?900 per tonne (85c to 95c per kilogram cif). As sheepmeats could not compete at this sort of level they had to be promoted separately with continued emphasis on packaging standards, fat cover, tenderness and presentation. Another key to the future was the reduction of processing and waterfront costs, he said. The cheapest port could load out meat at half the cost of the dearest, he said, a fact which clearly pointed to the opportunity to reduce some waterfront costs. The future for sheepmeats was brighter, he maintained, if costs could be reduced in processing, internal transport and loading and marketing changes already instituted were continued with. In response to a question from Mr E. W. Turrell, Federated Farmers meat and wool councillor and chairman of N.C.F. Kaiapoi Ltd, Mr Mcßae said the board was endeavouring to get companies to show more

information on their killing sheets. The true costs of killing and freezing and all the returns from pelts, by-pro-ducts and meat should be shown, he said. Farmers would have to pressure meat companies to get such information. Mr Turrell replied that the Meat Board owned all lambs and ewes slaughtered and was therefore now in a position to publish a gross schedule and show all deductions from that gross. Mr Barnett said that this was much easier said than done. The board owned product after the scales but killing charges and offal returns were part of the companies’ responsibilities. Mr R. E. Menzies, of Little Akaloa, said farmers were being asked to have complete faith in the board. Why couldn’t competing company pools be allowed as a check against the performance of the proposed national pool? Mr Mcßae replied that nothing else other than a national pool was feasible if a national marketing strategy was to be followed. The size of the Meat Industry Stabilisation Account debt, which stood at $340 million on September 30, 1983, worried all the farmers attending the meeting.

Mr Barnett said that the sheep and wool industry was not in a position to repay the M.I.S.A. debt and he hoped the Government would declare a moratorium on that debt for a while. The Meat Board representatives also said that the supplementary minimum payments for mutton were distorting the market returns and that many old ewes would not find their way to the works if the farmers got their true market return. A withdrawal of the worst grades of mutton from out of the killing and freezinng system might alleviate some of the worst of the losses, they said. Mr V. S. Shadbolt, of French Farm, asked what work was being undertaken by the Meat Industry Research Institute into canning of mutton. Mr Mcßae replied that plenty of work was underway, including research into canning, mechanical deboning and protein reconstitution. In a vote of thanks, Mr Paul de Latour, of Le Bons Bay, said that Banks Peninsula farmers generally believed the Meat Board was on the right line with its marketing reforms, although perhaps fine tuning could be suggested.