OUR FRUIT IMPORT RESTRICTIONS.

Dominion, Volume 1, Issue 197, 14 May 1908, Page 3

OUR FRUIT IMPORT RESTRICTIONS.

THE AUSTRALIAN OUTCRY. AN UNREASONABLE APPEAL. The . following appeared in tho " Sydney Dailj\Tclegrapli" last woelc:-T-: - " Tho monthly meeting of tho executive, of tlio : Fruitgrowers' Union of Now South Wales was held; at Castle' Hill on Saturday 'afternoon, with Mr. J. C. Hunt; '.M.L.A.j vice-president, in the. ; chair. ; ' ■ ' . ' ■ , " Mr. J. Neil (Dundas) brought up the ■ subject of restrictions imposed by tho • New "Zealand; .Government on ;importa- . tions of 'citrus fruit from New-tlouth Wales. He stated that the now regulations,( which .had just como' into opera- ■ tion, amounted., to prohibition, inasmuch as they-required,consignors of, fruit to ■ •cortifjr that'it was not grown-.withina '-, mile of any orchard infected frat fly. Importations-from the Islands were v : not; so treated, ■ and any "consignments' ' affected '; with fly ;• were allowed to be . picked over, v and the sound fruit : - mitted to. be landed. The attention of the Minister, for' Agriculture should be ;.: drawn to;.the matter, rand he should be: asked to use his influence with the. New ■Zealand Government to .have the restrictions modified. He moved to that effect; • i • also that a letter be draitted for publication in'the Now Zealatid Pressj'for the '■ purpose of . rousing public opinion there. ' ' against-suchunf air restrictions on citrus fruits from'this country. -. > ■".The chairman said,that.he saw the. \ ■ Minister,for Agriculture.only a.few days; / , ago on. this, mattery'and the latterstated v •; that he/had susgested to .the Now Zea- \ • land Government; that it should adopt "" regulations governing the importation of:■ fruit, similar to those now in vogue in tho- Commonwealth; He also said he would like to see - a few . prominent, , growers, with Mr. Hunt, to talk- over, this and other, matters affccting the in- • dustry.' ' "Mr. S. Phillips said that if the New . Zealand . embargo . was not- romoved it would , make';,a , vast difference to' the Sydney and Mdbourne "markets. . . ; The chairman :• suggested that the' • meeting should .appoint two or threo of. . their number ;to accompany him on a ' .visit to the Minister. . Tho. suggestion r was and Messrs. ,J; Neil, - S. Fagan,'„and B. Purser were appointed. V Mr. - Neil's' 'motion' regarding ' the; J drafting of - a letter for publication in the New.''Zealand ;Press- was adopted."V This t outcry in Australia is going- to most unreasonable: extremes. It is also based, to some extent, on inaccuTato .conceptions of It is not' true that tho Islands tare 'exempt from the ; new resulations. The only difference :is , that the' Islands are. to be 'allowed,a little.'longer time to learn of their existence, because it will take longer for the'. n6ws ,t6; reach- them. Tfto statement of 'Mr. Neil .that'lsland.fruit is allowed to be picked over.', so: that- the- unaffected/fruit may, be' marketed is also untrue; ' That procedure in former days was'/; it is considered, responsible for the first footing which, fruit fly obtained ; . in. New Zealand, but .it was stopped moro • than, eighteen months', ago.; The Islands today have- thesame restrictions to comply with,, as'the 'Australians/; ;'-' •! ''-• ■ The Australian-Minister's .alleged request, that ' New Zealand should . ba'satisfied' with £he regulations in - 'vogue' in : the* Common,wealth is' puzzling. : The New.' Zealand regulations" are practically, identical; witlPthose of South; Australia land Victoria, -except that ours 'aro; easier.;:.'; We only .'ask thatfruit' fly, shall 'bo -;unkiiown within a. mile of the, sourcS : bf tho -imported-fruitj but'Si uth'Aiis-\ ;tralii r land >yictp'ria . require -a" T still wider clean: farea.f. But,'- even; if" 1 thaib were } not 1 'so, ; is ' New': South -Wales' asking ' tis to 1 believe that she;cannot send us-fruit grown a mile away from known fruit fly? If so,"then that fact.;, overwhelmingly ;-our regulations.: 1..- ; ;-. ' :'" s ; Retaliation! 'Howvcan Australia use such a word? • Did Australia, when blight attacked • our- potatoes and.' -swine fever our 'pigs, .permit us to send potatoes and pigs that were produced a mile'; away f - from' in-fected-areas?;. On the ..contrary, prohibited >their -importation entirely ; and that prohibition is still in force. ; : In the face of these things, it would seem that the New Zealand regulations are really too lenient. The of the regulations upon, .Australian fruit. will. begin at Auckland next Sunday, and at. JVellington noxt Wednesday. / ■ •