PARLIAMENT

Greymouth Evening Star, 4 December 1940, Page 9

PARLIAMENT

SEA CARRIAGE OF GOODS. [per press association.] WELLINGTON, December 3. The House met to-day at 2.30 p.m. Moving the committal of the Sea Carriage of Goods Bill, the Minister of Industries and Commerce (Mr. Sullivan), said that the measure defined the responsibilities, rights and liabilities of shippers”and ship-owners in respect of goods carried by sea. Prior to this class of legislation being enacted, there had been an increasing tendency on the part of ship-owners to write in clauses in bills of lading, the general objective of which was to protect themselves against almost every kind of liability, and the posi-, tion had become so confused and unsatisfactory that an international agreement was reached in 1923 for fixing the liability and Responsibility, and an Imperial Act was passed in 1924, embodying these provisions. The Imperial Conference, in 1926, had asked the Dominions to pass legislation bringing them into line with the Imperial Act, and this request was being carried out by New Zealand. The Minister said that, as far as coastwise trade was concerned, New Zealand would observe the old rule, because of custom and the decisions concerning it; but the new legislation would apply to overseas trade. The Bill was put through the committee stages and read the third time and passed with practically no discussion. The Mokau Harbour Bill was also put through the remaining stages and passed.

PRICE OF FRUIT. Mr. Nash moved the second reading of the Agricultural Emergency Regulations Confirmation Bill, an annual measure, which usually goes through all stages without discussion. Mr. W. J. Broadfoot (Nat., Waitomo), discussing the Bill, said the regulations were far-reaching and affected almost every member of the community. It seemed that, in common with other emergency regulations, the consumer had been completely forgotten. He criticised as high the price being charged for lemons when they were retailed to the public, and the low prices paid to the growers; stating that, as a result of low prices in the Bay of Plenty district, a bulldozer was pulling up lemon trees. If that were so, the Minister should make a close investigation. Mr. H. S. S. Kyle (Nat., Riccarton): They are pulling up apple trees in Canterbury. Mr. Kyle also contended that the Government had broken down in its system of distribution. Never in the history of the country had the consumer to pay so much for fruit. Yet it was being tipped out on rubbish dumps. Moreover, it was a disgrace for the Government to put on the market rotten material that was being sold. Mr. A. G. Osborne (Govt., Onehunga), said the Government’s Marketing Division had inaugurated an orderly system, and was repacking every case of apples before it was paid for by the consumer. As the result of this system, retailers and consumers were able to purchase cases of sound fruit. The evidence up to the present was that there had been less wastage and less decay of fruit this year than in any previous year.

MR. NASH’S REPLY. Mr. Nash, in reply, said that the prices paid to the growers for lemons last year were better than they had been for the past five years, and he thought that he was correct in saying they were better than ever before. The Government, he remarked, had lost some money on the marketing of lemons, but not much. As far as the pulling of some trees out in Tauranga was concerned, these trees, Mr. Nash pointed out, had been affected by the citrus canker, and the grower had received compensation. The Tauranga growers were well satisfied with the arrangements that had been made. Referring to the marketing of apples and of pears, Mr. Nash said that the apples had reached the consumer in New Zealand at a lower price than previously. Just because the price of apples was 6d per pound at present, some people had stated that they had never been so dear before, but, peisonally, he remembered apples being sold for 8d per pound. The Government had not wished to market apples, said Mr. Nash, and it had only consented to do so at the request of the apple growers. The Minister stressed three points in connection with fruit marketing:— (1) Apples and pears were marketed because the growers desired the Government to market them. (2) More fruit had been sold than ever before. (3) The fruit had been sold cheaper than ever before. Referring to the apples exported last season, Mr. Nash said some 580,000 cases of fruit had been sent away. The surplus on the fruit sent overseas would be a little greater than the loss on the fruit marketed locally. The surplus on fruit sold overseas would be about £200,000, and the loss on that sold on the New Zealand market would be very approximately £200,000. It was the Government’s duty to avoid any wastage, and in the fruit marketing there had been less wastage than previously. Moreover, no good fruit had been wasted. Mr. Nash said they should try and find a way to compensate the Quitgrowers on a low economic basis. We may pay a little more than we did last year,” he added, “and, if there is a loss, the House must not criticise. The Bill was put through the remaining stages and passed.

LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL WELLINGTON, December 3. The Small Farms Amendment Bill came before the Legislative Council to-day. The bill was read a first time, and a second time pro forma, and was then referred to the Lands Committee. The Council adjourned until tomorrow.