FROZEN MEAT.

Evening Star, Issue 21786, 31 July 1934, Page 8

FROZEN MEAT.

The meat export “ crisis,” as it is grandiloquently, though perhaps .accurately, termed, has been slow in developing. Its origins may be traced to August, 1932, when the meat agreements were made at Ottawa. It was then stated in a declaration by Britain that wholesale prices of frozen meat were at a level which resulted in grave depression in the live stock industries of the United Kingdom and the dominions. The declaration continued : “ Such a position is so serious that it is essential to take whatever steps may appear feasible to raise the wholesale prices of frozen meat in the United Kingdom to such a level as will main tain efficient production. The policy Of His Majesty’s Government is, first to secure development of home production, apd, second to> give the dominions an expanding share of impoirts into the United Kingdom.” The mistake made by the New Zealand frozen meat industry seems to have been in assuming that an expanding share in Britain’s imports meant increased instead of decreased shipments. Exporters acted upon this belief in respect of frozen beef, for New Zealand was mainly responsible for an increase of nearly 25

per cent, iu imports of that commodity from the southern dominions. And at first the industry .acted on it in respect of mutton and lamb, until Britain in alarm, towards the end of 1932, persuaded Australia and New Zealand to keep shipments within bounds during 1.933,, which they did by effecting a decrease of (5.6 per cent. Supplies from other sources were even more drastically curtailed, since u Britain’s “ foreign ” imports showed a decrease of 17 per cent., her imports from all sources showing a decrease of 9 per cent. The strain of self-denial was less severe on Australia than on New Zealand, because the drought which has now been de finitely ended in Australia by copious and widespread rains undoubtedly affected killings there for export. The reductions suggested at Ottawa were empirically fixed, and it is now evident that the effect of them on British markets has not satisfied the Ministry of Agriculture, for successive yearly decreases of exports are spoken of. In respect of mutton, Mr Elliot is hard to satisfy. Since November, 1932, when the first emergency regulation of imports took effect, wholesale prices of English nlutton have risen by 36 per cent., and those of imported ‘mutton by no less than 70 per cent. But the price of home-grown fat sheep only rose 13 per cent.,* which indicates that the farmer participated to the extent of only one third iu the qiarket rise, and the middleman appropriated the other two thirds. On the other hand the retail butchers passed on to their customers so little as to suggest that they may have been working at a loss, for retail prices advanced only 6 per cent. The big vise in prices of imported mutton were welcome to the New Zealand pastoralist, for previously they had been at a disappointingly low level; but it appears to us that, instead of asking the dominions to again reduce shipments, Mr Elliot would be better employed iu finding and plugging the leak or gap between the price to the farmer and the wholesale price at Smithfield. Taking his scheme of agricultural reform right through, that kind of discrepancy appears to be its weak spot. In the matter of beef the position is different, and there seems some justification for restriction of imports. During 1933 in Britain the index price of fat cattle fell from 115 to 101, and of store cattle from 114 to 98, involving British farmers in further heavy losses. As to beef the Ottawa agreements have certainly failed to achieve their purpose. The breeder and fattener of cattle in BHtain has occupied first place throughout in Mr Elliot’s mind’s eye. It is safe to assuine that it is in his interests that the New Zealand fat sheep and lamb industry is being threatened with contracting markets. The British consumer is to be more or less forcibly induced to order more and more British beef from the butcher—if he can pay for it. What that price is, based On what Mr Elliot, the middleman, and the British grazier conceive as a payable one to the last-named, we have not ascertained; but we imagine that it is something beyond the means of the middle classes, let alone the masses. If Mr Elliot is allowed his hegd indefinitely he will go down in history possibly as the saviour of the British farmer, and possibly not; but certainly as the greatest disturber of markets on record. Even the New Zealand dairy farmer has bfeen given an extra grievance through the interdict on bobby calf export, and the infant pork export industry is to be stunted in its growth. About the only refreshing circumstance in connection with the whole business is the.evident resentment of the New Zealand Goverm ment towards Government interference in business. This time the intruder happens to be another Government, which fact discloses for the first time the heinousuess of the offence. Our own Government’s manipulation of the currency, no doubt, in its eyes, falls in quite another category. Yet we are tempted to wonder if there is any connection between British quotas and the New Zeajand rate pf exchange.