MUTUAL INTERESTS

Evening Post, Volume CXVI, Issue 22, 26 July 1933, Page 8

MUTUAL INTERESTS

NEW ZEALAND'S TRADE WITH

BRITAIN

(To tho Editor.)

Sir, —I am sorry Mr. H. G. Richardson, in his letter to '"The Post." in Monday's issue / does not agree with my previous note to your valued paper. I agree with him that our butter, produced with .. splendid sun-ripened grass, is ideal. I further agree with Mr. Richardson that the average New Zealander eats more butter, and he also eats more meat and drinks more tea than the Englishman, and we can't help it, and on the other hand we cannot make him follow our lead either.

Mr. Richardson asks who are the "powerful influences" in England behind the quota system. The answer is bo simply found by reading the daily, cables—the land owners and farmers. Land still pro,vidcs England's largest industry, and at last they have formed.'aj guild for self-pro-tection. : Since, the formation- of this guild Uiey have seen' their power as a voting unit, and'l assure Mr. Richardson these men are, not going to allow their living, which has in many cases been particularly hard in the past, to be simply taken away by unfair tactics, no more than any union or combination of interests would 'here. Our high exchange ' undoubtedly places them in that position.

Perhaps I may be pardoned if I remind your correspondent that these very men fought a financial combination with success while a very few years ago our own Government lost a very ' similar fight,. which cost New Zealand over two millions. It may be as well for me to point out to Mr. Richardson that in order to allow the average Englishman, to obtain money to purchase butter or anything else, it is very necessary to' have money, or in other words employment,;: and though the fact of this Dominion' with high exchange almost prohibits exports, ho\y on earth is he to consume more of anything without the wherewithal? His energy and time would serve a much better purpose if he directed all his attention to seeing that we in New Zealand purchased nothing but English goods, even against Australian, and give them the same square deal that he in his letter expects from them. I£ he had any practical knowledge of New Zealand trade today he would know that this exchange has thrown us into the arms of Australia, and weekly "our trade with that sister State increases, particularly in the iron industry, to England's detriment, and yet we have the audacity to ask them not to protect themselves, but still, open their doors wider to us. Isn't it silly? There are still very few avenues of trade open to us provided there was a strong commercial side attached to our New Zealand House in London—men who could study that market carefully, and then direct us here to moot the opening. Let us work to make our butter spreadable for those extra nine months in the year north of London amidst the great population almost untouched by us today. Is it reasonable to ask the housewife to spread a lunch with butter that cuts hard like cheese, against an easily spreadable one from Denmark, which, although costing more, is yet more economic by virtue of that fact? In answer to the correspondent's suggestion of the consumer getting a' cheap article, is it worse for us to continue producing the cheapest cheese on the English market, and is that fact increasing our sales? Cheese is one thing the Englishmarl does know something about, so in order to do any good let us clean up our own house first like our farmers have been forced to do with wool. Until we do this how can we expect results with the choicest the world can produce at London's command? Trade is the only wealth today, but to. enjoy' that wealth there must be a mutual understanding without artificial barriers which very frequently create unpleasant reactions. —I am, etc., LEONARD McKENZIE. ■