FREEDOM FOR THE FARMER

Dominion, Volume 29, Issue 258, 28 July 1936, Page 11

FREEDOM FOR THE FARMER

N.Z. Freezing’ Industry MEAT BOARD’S POLICY The policy of the Meat Board in respect of overseas interests in New Zealand freezing works is discussed at some length in its annual report, which states that, while welcoming the competition of overseas interests in the Dominion, the, board has always realised that the position must be watched to see that a healthy competitive atmosphere is maintained. To-day the farmer can sell his fat stock either at the schedule prices of fered, on the hoof on the farm, or on the hooks at the freezing works. If he is dissatisfied with the prices offered by buyers in the Dominion he has facilities in every district for killing and shipping on his own account, and so testing the London market for him self. The board has also kept the shipping arrangements in its own hands, and has provided that the small farmer shipping on his own account is charged the same freight as the largest operator. Since its inception any proposed transfer of a meat export-slaughter-house licence has been submitted to the board by the Minister of Agriculture for its recommendation; likewise any proposed alterations or additions to freezing works. The latter was especially important if it involved an increase in the killing books or in the storage accommodation at the works. Whenever the board considered any such proposals were not in the best interests of the meat producer it recommended accordingly to the Minister. Later with the introduction of the chain system it became necessary to control the position by other means and the Slaughtering and Inspection Amendment Act, passed in 1934, bestowed additional powers on the Government and the Meat Board. Open Market Essential. It will be readily realised, the report continues, that if there were no control of the channels for treating and exporting the farmers’ fat stock, in other words, if complete freedom in regard to these matters were granted, the freezing works would rapidly become the property of the large overseas interests as also, would, the export business. The trade in Britain would then have to buy from, these exporters, and the open market in Britain for our meat would disappear or would be severely curtailed. We want the strongest competition possible for stock in the field in New Zealand that is consistent with a free and open market in Britain for meat, and the actions of the board are directed to achieve this end. If the Meat Board permits the New Zealand meat-exporting concerns to be put out of business by the large overseas concerns, it follows that the independent sellers of New Zealand meat at Smithfield and other parts of Britain, will also be put out of business, as their only source of supply is the New Zealand independent exporters. The whole New Zealand meat trade would then be in the hands of the few big meat concerns that now largely control the South American and Australian supplies. Under these conditions the “open door” to the British market would be of no value to the New Zealand farmer, ns he would have no selling agent in Britain other than the big concerns, who would give him the price fixed from time to time among themselves. The control of the New Zealand meat market would then be as effectually in the hands of the few Targe meat concerns ns it would he if they owned all the works in New Zealand. Must Take Long View. The board will not countenance any attempt of a company or a group of companies to establish anything in the nature of a monopoly, and no exporter will be allowed to export a quantity which in the opinion of the board would deprive other traders of a reasonable share of the output. If this were permitted, other distributing agencies would be deprived of supplies and would turn to other sources for their stocks. It is in New Zealand s interest to have as many distributing agencies as possible interested in the selling of her products. The “open market” in Smithfield is essential. It may even' be necessary to restrict competition which may temporarily give farmers a higher price, as what is called “free competition” now may only be a prelude to no competition in the near future. The board must take the long view in this matter, and so must the farmers. Those who advocate absolute freedom of competition are shutting their eyes to what this freedom has led to in the meat business of other countries. The board has definitely fixed its policy against excessive control of freezing works by overseas interests, and to this extent it must be realised by the New Zealandowned freezing companies that they have an immense privilege given to them by the Government and the Meat Board.