LOSS OF £26,000

Gisborne Herald, Volume LXVI, Issue 20074, 21 October 1939, Page 10

LOSS OF £26,000

GISBORNE DISTRICT PROPOSAL FROM NAPIER WOOL VALUING CENTRES SHEEPOWNERS’ PROTEST If Napier’s claims to the Gisborne 'and East Coast wool for appraisement purposes are upheld, the Gisborne dis. trict would lose £26,000, according to an estimate made by the Poverty Bay and East Coast Sheepowners’ Union, which has been active in pressing the claims of Gisborne and the Coast centres.

The Sheepowners’ Union has been in touch with the Minister of Marketing, the Hon. W. Nash, on the matter, and to-day issued a statement of the union’s views on the subject.

“It must be interesting to the sheepfarmers of this district to read of Napier’s protest at the suggested appointment of Gisborne as an appraisement centre,” the statement says. “While the matter is admittedly occasioning some concern to the business interests of Napier, it is more vital still to the woolgrowers of this district.

“Two policy matters of paramount importance to the Dominion have been advocated, namely, elimination of national waste and increased production from the soil. Only by the farmer receiving, under the present conditions, the maximum returns for his produce can this object be achieved. Burden of Transport “During the 1916-20 commandeer, appraisement of wool was carried out in Gisborne, Tolaga Bay and Tokomaru Bay, and Napier’s protest against even Gisborne being appointed on this occasion would simply mean that local woolgrowers would be asked to bear the heavy burden of transport to Hawke’s Bay. “It is well known that Gisborne possesses extensive wool storage accommodation, well lighted and adequately equipped for the handling of the business. These stores now deal with the dumping of wool for overseas shipment, providing work there, on the wharves and in the roadstead.

“Napier not merely complains at a prospective loss of approximately 23,000 bales of Poverty Bay wool regularly sent there for sale, but now naively demands the lot, which would include a further 30,000 bales that are customarily shipped from this district direct to London. Loss of wages to local wool store workers, and to watersiders means nothing to them, nor are they concerned with the capital sunk by local firms in expensive stores and the loss of revenue that will have to be faced by district harbour boards, probably necessitating increased rating.

Charge of 12/- a Bale

“This district anxiously awaits an official pronouncement, and woolgrowers will be bitterly disappointed if 50,000 to 60,000 bales are taxed with transport charges that may average 12s per bale and local interests deprived of revenue and wages that rightly should be retained in Poverty Bay as in 1916 to 1920. “The importance of Gisborne being appointed an appraisement centre can readily be appreciated from the above remarks, and it is earnestly hoped that all those concerned in the handling of wool on behalf of the producers will use every endeavour to save their customers the additional waste expenditure that would be incurred if the Poverty Bay clip were transported to Napier. “There has been a suggestion _ that some mercantile firms with Dominion representation are not supporting this district’s requirements as strongly as they might do so, but we trust that this suggestion is incorrect, as we can hardly conceive of brokers acting against the financial interests of their customers.

“So far as we are able to ascertain, there appears to be no logical reason why the Gisborne producei should be asked to suffer a loss of about £26,000 for the benefit of Napier, and this, in substance, is v/hat is asked. By Gisborne being appointed an appraisement centre, this direct loss is saved, and in addition the district retains within itself the cost incidental to the handling of the wool from this port. We submit that our arguments are incontrovertible and that Napier has no equitable rights to benefit at the expense of the producers of this district.”