N.Z. MEAT BOARD

Evening Post, Volume CIX, Issue 150, 29 June 1925, Page 7

N.Z. MEAT BOARD

APPROVAL BY FOOD COMMISSION

NEWSPAPER CHARGES REFUTED

SUPPLIES NOT lU2LD BACK

(FROM OUK OWN .CORRESPONDENT.).'. .LONDON, 22nd May. bo tar as the meat trade generaliy is concerned there is perhaps not agreat deal in the first report of tho ■Hoyal Commission on Food Prices— which has come-but as a Blue Book withmmutes of evidence and appen-clices-that is of any very practical }-alue. Neither have any very revolutionary steps been recommended.

a But from the point of view of the Dominion and of the New Zealand Meat Producers 1 Board there are points of interest, not the .least important of which .is that - the Commission recognises the usefulness of the board's purposes;- and they 'completely;vindicate the.New. Zealand Meat Producers' Board by coming unanimously to the conclusion that the chargesimadea few.months ago by some of the London newspapers have not been proved.: They have, found practically that there has not been any great profiteering—indeed, beef.is one of the most reasonably priced articles of food obtainable compared with" pre-war prices. ' f Sr -r-» si Snifioant to note that the "Daily Mail, which* early, in ..the year, had a great deal to sayabout .its charge of ■food, profiteering,: lias so far been discreetly silent on the findings of the "■ report..- One of the principal duties of the Commission was to inquire into the charges made by various papers that the operations of" the New'- Zealand Meat Producers' Board were directed against the interests of the consumers in this country.; The board/ it was:alleged, had kept back supplies, in order to: increase prices. .. ;.- . . ... :

. ..Before' the Commission, Mr. Forsyth, it. will be recalled,',gave much helpful (information regarding/the board, the reason for its establishment, and the method of its work;; .'also, he gave valuable data as to .periods of killing, as well as stock census .figures. -The Commission recognises that from the seasonal nature of the industry, .that i£ supplies were shipped and placed on the market as soon as they W£.re ready ; there. -would be periods of glut followed.by periods of shortage., .

RECOGNITION OF THE BOARD'S

OBJECTS

, The Commission fully, and completely decided that there is no foundation for the charge of : ; holding back supplies. They realise thatithe objects of the board were merely.to regulate the flow of meat so that it should be marketed regularly over twelve 1 months of the year and ensure the stabilised price to the producers. -.. - 1-.;..'- „-■: : : -;-. /- : ■;"■"■-.. ...-.-;

They say : . "Immediately after the creation- of ■'the u\leat . Producers' Board prices began to .advance and have: continued rising ~ until to-day. Ihe price of a, fat lamb at the end of ;; 1924.;, varied from 36s to '40s per' head. , It, is not surprising, therefore, that meat traders" and con-: sinners in this country are inclined to attribute ■■ to: the. activities ' of-.:the New' Zealand; Meat Producers' Board i some part, ;at any rate, 'of tho : responsibility for the sharp rise in the price, of New Zealand lamb and mutton during 'the four years that • the board ? has been in existence., Nor is.Vit surprising to find that the board is popular with the NewZealand' producers, : and is willing -to assume all the credit it can for--the more_ favourable .turn of affah-s since its creation. We have consequently been led to make;.very careful inquiry into the constitution" and: functions of this board and into:the--.effects,"if any, upon the price of mutton and lamb which may fairly be attributed to the exercise of: the very wide, powers. with which it is entrusted." ■ ■ •■:. :

COMPLAINT WITHOUT FOUNDATION

"In .December: last, shortly after we were appointed,-. our attention was drawn to the high prices quoted for New Zealand lamb, and to allegations that these were due to the holding: back of supplies by the Meat Producers' Board: On inquiry we found that in fact there was practically no New Zealand lamb on the market at the time; that the prices^ quoted were being realised, for the most part for Australian lamb and not for New Zealand-lamb; and'that so far as the New Zealand board cou ] d be 3aid to have influenced the level of prices then ruling, the most that could be said waß that if the board had not; allowed the ■whole of last season's lamb to be disposed of in ten months, but had'held supplies upfor_ a few : weeks longer, the prices ruling m December last might have been lower,' The complaint commonly made that the board were deliberately holding up supplies in New Zealand- (although their .published statistics showed that their stocks of lamb; were. actually exhausted) proved to be> without foundation.' ...-.' ' „.-.-..

"Our conclusion -from such evidence as •we-have" taken is that the operations of the New Zealand Meat Producers' Board have not been an important factor in determining; the higher average Idve]. of mutton and lamb prices during the last' three years. Indeed, we find it difficult ] to see how the board can be responsible for' raising the average level of "prices unless it can be shown either to have deliberately withheld or diverted supplies from the British market, or to have taken steps directly or indirectly to restrict production. Neither of these possible alternatives has,/-in fact, been adopted, and we do not believe that either coui-sq .represents the, policy of the New Zealand meat producers or tho New Zealand Government. While there is a .common interest amongst producers in regulating the flow of supplies and stabilising prices, there is no identity of interest when it comes to disposing of their stock to the. refrigerating companies ; and we can well believe that it would bo exceedingly difficult,'not to say impossible, to enforce a common policy of restricting production on the New.Zealand farmers. Moreover, though New Zealand lamb is in a class by itself there is plenty of competition from other countries which would soon render the policy of restricting production abortive and unprofitable. : . CONCLUSION, AFTER HEARING LORD VESTEY It will bo a matter of interest to New .Zealand to know that after hearing Lord Vestey's evidence on tho effect, of speculation, the Convmjssion express the belief that responsible opinion in :t.lie trade "shares our view, that the higher prices now ruling, for Now Zealand mutton and lamb cannot be attributed to the notion of the board in regulating supplies. We have, , however, heard complaints from certain' witnesses on the ground that by regulating shipments the board is able to prevent a glut in the London-market. Normally a glut in London would /jc reflected by lower buying prices in New Zealand. As it'in, wn lire infonnnd'thul large r>p. ecatui'E utjver have an apporluutty of

forcing down prices in New Zealand in the hope of making profits from a subsequent recovery. It seems to be ad- , mitted on all "hands that the board have succeeded in reducing the activities of speculators, but since temporary depressions of price have a disturbing effect on production, and confer no corresponding benefit on consumers, we cannot endorse the view that the" opeviilior.s of tint board have run counter loathe general interests of Great Britain as a consuming country." On this head the report of the Commission is very satisfactory from tho New Zealand point of view, it having established the above facts, backed by Lord Vestey's evidence, given under cross-examination. SUGGESTED CO-OPERATION There is a proposal that the Food Prices Council should co-operate with the New Zealand Meat Producers' Board, and Mr. Forsyth welcomes the idea. The official summary reads •— -.. "The existence of the board introduces a new factor into the imported meat trade, which may have very important consequences for this country. Under ...their, existing statutory powers the board may at any time establish an effective monopoly for the sale of New Zealand meat in the markets of the world. For this reason we. think it is essential that the operations of the New Zealand Meat Producers' Board should be subject to continuous and sympathetic observation by a body representing air interests concerned in this country, such as: tho Food Council which we are recommending Your Majesty's Government to set up. We feel that a body of this kind, in close and constant contact with the imported meat trade in all its ramifications would be in a position to co-operate with the New Zealand ' Meat Producers' Board in the legiti- : mate and beneficial-objects which it seeks to achieve, and to intervene with friendly counsel if at any time the board ' should be led'by pressure on the part of the producers in New Zealand to take any action which might be construed as detrimental to British interests. Association of the Food Council with tho activities of "such producers' organisations would also serve to dispel unjust suspicion and reassure public opinion in this country that the" consumer was not being unfairly exploited." \ ' USEFUL RECOMMENDATIONS : The Commission have strongly recommended the adoption of the proposal by the New ..Zealand Meat Producers' Board that statistics as to quantities of meat in store in Great Britain should be .published monthly by the Board of Trade. ', •- ; • ■ ... •.,.;-.- PROPOSED REGISTRATION OF BUTCHERS The suggestion has been made that ■ the retail butchers should be licensed \ and: registered through the Food-Coun-cil. In thovcase of any misdemeanour, ■ such ; as wrongful handling of meat, it would be a very serious matter for the retailer if his license were withdrawn, for this would practically put him out of . business, .while from, the-New Zealand, meat trade point of jview the tendency would be to checkthe practices of wrongful retailing. „•» v v Begistration is recommended mainly in "tho interests of the consuming pub-/ lie as. a means of securing closer 'supervision by ; local authorites over'-'|the retail meat trade; but in itself we do not : think-:that registration is in', any way . contrary to the legitimate , intereste of :meat_: traders. ..' . '. vEetailers of meat of all kinds for human consunrption \vould be. required- to ;.,apply for , registration within a" specified:period and at the out-' set every retailer who applied would be entitled to.have his name placed on'the' register as amatter '.of course; The! withdrawal or cancellation of registration would only be resorted'to as 'an extreme measure., in consequence of persistent ■ breach of the conditions laid down. We •believe that.Uhe .mere threat of cancelling registration would, in the/great majority of cases, be sufficient to bring about the abolition of practices which are/contrary to the.public interest." , . ' ,