PRODUCE MARKETING

Dominion, Volume 26, Issue 171, 15 April 1933, Page 12

PRODUCE MARKETING

’'Problem for New Zealand j EASTERN TRADE URGED Aspects of the problem confronting New Zealand as a result of the glutted British dairy produce market are discussed by Mr. C. H. Burnett, of Wanganui, in a letter -to the. editor, dated April 11. Mr. Burnett urges that an effort be made to establish fresh markets iu the East. "I think it will be generally conceded that Mr. William Goodfellow is one of tne best, if not the best authority we have in the Dominion on dairy matters,” Mr. Burnett writes. "He levelled a serious indictment against the Government when he declared unreservedly that in raising the rate of exchange a distinct breach of the spirit if not the letter of the Ottawa Agreement was made. Mr. Goodfellow goes even further when he says, the Government raised the exchange without making any corresponding reduction in the tariff and thus not only breaking the spirit of the Ottawa Agreement, but placing a further disability of 15 per cent, on New Zealand importations from Britain. Apart from the fact that the raising of,the exchange placed additional burdens on thousands of unemployed, the benefit to farmers in serious circumstances was negligible in view of the increased cost of living and farming costs generally. It is difficult, however, ’to reconcile Mr. Goodfellow's views .when he later refers to the dairy restriction proposal as "pernicious and one likely to play into the hands of the foreigner.” In other words, Mr. Goodfellow, while recognising the serious breach of the spirit of the Ottawa Agreement, urges the unrestricted dumping of our dairy products ou the British market. "Despite the overtures made from London by responsible people it would seem, at the moment, that the Dairy Board is determined on a policy of non-restriction which is definitely supported by ' Mr. Goodfellow. That these views are not generally held by important butter interests is evidenced by the Press Association report on Saturday last of a meeting of Canterbury butter factory . representatives who strongly favour restriction. My personal view is that the only course open to dairy producers, in the circumstances and having in view the critical state of the industry, as it exists to-day, and especially having in view the importance of maintaining the best relations with the British authorities generally, is cheerfully to agree to the proposal of a 6 per cent, restriction. It is a case' of taking our medicine and taking it as cheerfully as possible. Surely it is not for us to presume to dictate a policy to Britain; but having placed the serious position of our dairy industry before the Home authorities, to fall in with any reasonable proposals mutually made to relieve the position generally. Further, it is not for us to question what Britain may in the future exact from us in the way of restrictions, bnt to remember and appreciate the considerations Britain has extended to our Dominion in the past. “Let us view the position not so much from the aspect of a 6 per cent, restriction, but from the angle that Britain has been pleased to take from us free of duty 94 per cent, of our exportable surplus equal to 112.800 tons of butter, giving us the generous tariff of 15 per cent, against the foreigner to the detriment of her own farmers and her own consumers, and above all let us not forget that we reciprocated by placing a further 15 per cent disability on her importations to this country. “A very much greater consumption of butter could be stimulated in this country by having the retail price around Bd. a lb. With regard to further markets to absorb our surplus, necessity is the mother of invention. This is applicable to our Dairy Board to-day. It is not until our Dairy Board is seriously confronted with a position such as has arisen, that they will appreciate the fact that Britain is reaching, if it has not reached, saturation point. It is unquestioned that with tariff restriction Britain can produce a great deal more butter herself, and it behoves us to be tip and doing in regard to nur reciprocal trade with her. Our Dairy Board have never seriously explored the Eastern markets, Excepting Australia we are closer to Eastern markets than either Canada or America, and yet we find that Australia has greatly increased her trade with the East, while our trade has fallen away. America has also acquired a valuable business in preserved milks. Several years back our Government arranged for a well-known authority on such matters to inquire into Eastern markets. . His bulletin containing some 40 pages on the prospects of extending New Zealand’s trade with Japan. China and Hong Kong I have before me as I write. It makes most interesting reading. “This authoritv makes it quite clear that while there are difficulties there are great possibilities in the East for our dairy products. The report is definite that direct shipments must necessarily be arranged and that representative agents are essential in fostering the trade. Advertising through the medium of the film and poster is also strongly urged. The best advertiser recommended is the products themselves. “What i" there to prevent the Dairy Board sending a trial shipment of say 5.000 tons of our restricted surplus into Eastern markets? Does not the present difficulty present.an excellent onnoftuhity to “try out” these markets?.' What is to nrevent the Dairy Board setting aside 25 per rent, of its annual levy of £40.000 tn assist finance sticlf n trial shipment or shipments? Only a few days hack tve had Japanese vessels loading old iron. T could not help thinking how much more important it would be to our eonntrv if the vessel could have heen loaded '--ilb our dairy products.”