FRUIT EMBARGO

Evening Post, Volume CXV, Issue 124, 29 May 1933, Page 6

FRUIT EMBARGO

(To the Editor.)

Sir,—lt would appear that a determined effort is being made by what I suspect are interested parties to have the embargo on Australian fruit removed. Your correspondent'"Live and Let Live" must be well aware that Australia.-will not admit our potatoes, even if certified free of disease. The growers there do not want competition, hence the charge of corky scab or some other imaginary disease. As regards apples, even if there is such an abundance of that fruit in Australia, is. that any reason why we, should

be deprived of a market. there if we can compete?! And, o£ course,, there are other things that we could sell in Australia were it not for a tariff wall impossible to climb over.. I am afrnid that both "European Retailer" and "Live and Let Live" are quite indifferent to the welfare of our own producers, and have,never, considered how much unemployment might be reduced it' we could have an open market in Australia for our produce. But apparently it is all right for Australia to maintain a heavy tariff amounting to an embargo against practically all New Zealand produce, but the Dominion must not under any circumstances protect its own producers. The influenza bogy can be dismissed, as there need be no fear of a shortage of citrus fruits, of which ample supplies are available from our own islands as well as California. Much is being made of the present cost of. these fruits, but are they really any dearer than in the. relative period in other years when Australian fruit was free .to come in? I think not. I commend the Government for its action, and hope that it will stand firm.—l am, etc., ;' ,<, FAIR PLAY.