FRUIT CONTROL BILL.

Evening Star, Issue 18773, 24 October 1924, Page 6

FRUIT CONTROL BILL.

TO THE EDITOR. Sir,—l am afraid that the few lukewarm Otago supporters of the Bill in its present form will gather but few crumbs of comfort from Mr Brash's letter in your issue of the 22nd inst. It will be conceded that once our local market standards are fixed we will have solved one of the principal difficulties in the successful marketing of our fruit locally. The same remarks apply with equal force to our export trade, but no ono knows better than Mr Brash that these standards are already an established fact, and under complete Government control,' so what more could a con Val board do? As a matter of fact, one might be forgiven for venturing the opinion that there is a danger of those standards being lowered if one is guided by the views of the promoters of the Bill in Nelson, as these gentlemen have already approached the Government to lower the color standards in some cases. It is all very well for Mr Brash to talk of shipping contracts, but he knows quite well that one essential point in this respect is quantity; and whereas it may be quite possible to dictate to the shipping companies on the strength of the bulk of freight offering in the shape of meat and dairy produce, it is quite another matter with trie comparatively small tonnage in fruit, combined with the very special stowage and treatment it requires. As regards reductions in freight, it has been distinctly understood that this matter is fought out in London by the Australian and Tasmanian shippers of fruit, who ship ten cases to our one, and we have a definite promise that any reductions granted will automatically apply to New Zealand. Mr Brash refers to the matter of new markets, but I think the last letter from Mr Attwood, in London, may be taken ius a guide in this respect. Ho says; ‘'Some of our' growers are unduly agitated about the need for opening up new markets. It is quite all right if you have the goods. But hero in the United Kingdom alone—where our fruit has reached the premier position, and has set the standard of excellence—it is becoming increasingly known and asked for. This is a market that can absorb .all tho fruit New Zealand can supply for many years to come. The market is here, April to early August inclusive, always at remunerative prices, for ‘choice’ New Zealand apples and pears. Our problems as New Zealand fruitgrowers must be solved in New Zealand. Briefly, they are these i (a) To pick only choice exportable fruit; (b) to pick it at tne correct stage of maturity ; (c) to pack it in such a way as to stand the many rough handlings inevitable in its long journey between producer and consumer. Each oi these points is of vital importance to the industry, and the experience gained lasi year and this (the profit and loss) should help materially to their solution.” Mr Attwood is a supporter of the principle of control, but, like Mr Brash, he unwittingly puts forward arguments which i actually support tho main contention of the I opponents of the Bill—viz. ; that a Conj trol Bill could work no radical change for I the better in the existing conditions which i make for the success of our trade.

Once again Mr Brash carefully sidesteps the provincial export control issue, and while he assures those interested in the local market section that they have the very reasonable protection of being at liberty to come in or stop out, ho is not prepared to grant the same privilege to the exporter. It would be difficult to prophesy the fate of the Bill; but one could not imagine any Government putting this legislation on the statutes in the face of Snch decided and widespread opposition to the measure in itn present form from all parts of the country.—l am, etc., H. Teener. October 24*