The Hawera Star. WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 18, 1933. OPERATION OF MEAT QUOTA.

Hawera Star, Volume LIII, 18 October 1933, Page 4

The Hawera Star.

WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 18, 1933. OPERATION OF MEAT QUOTA.

Delivered every evening by 5 o’clock in Hawera Ma-naia, Kaupokonui, Otakeho Oeo, Pihama, Opunake, Normanby, Okaiawa, Eltham, Ngaere, Mangatoki, Kaponga. Awatuna, Te Kiri, ManceLowgarth, Manutahi, Kakaramea, Alton, Hurleyville, Patea, Whenuakura, Waverley, Mokoia, Whakamara, Ohangai, Meremere. Fraser Road and Ararata.

The statement regarding the meat outlook from New Zealand made by Mr. David Jones, chairman of the Meat Board, and published in our columns yesterday, makes very interesting reading for dairy farmers as well as for farmers directly interested in the meat export trade. It does not, of course, follow that Mr Jones’s optimistic survey of the results which have followed the introduction of the meat quota should cause dairy farmers to accept a cheese quota gladly, but the meat position, as outlined by the board chairman, does draw attention to the possibility of price-benefits following upon the introduction of a quota—a possibility which has been overlooked during the recent discussions of the quota system as applied to cheese. The New Zealand delegation to the Ottawa Conference has had plenty of criticism but very little praise since the termination of the conference and yet, as Mr Jones is able to show, the producers of meat would have been very much worse off to-day without the quota and without the quota preferences over foreign exporters gained for them at Ottawa. Dairymen are apt to forget that, though they 'have still to encounter the quota issue, they are enjoying a tariff preference over the foreign exporter at present as a result of Ottawa and have also established in the minds of the Home authorities that, in the event of a quota being applied to dairy produce, New Zealand has a, claim to preferential treatment over the foreigner. The meat quota, as tlie board chairman points out, excluded this year about 40,000 tons of beef and one million carcases of mutton and lamb from the English market. These restrictions are to be increased by the imposition of a further 5 per cent, reduction on foreign mutton and lamb in January, 1934, and an additional 5 per cent, reduction in April of next year. “If tbis meat had been allowed to flow unrestricted into Britain,” said Mr Jones, referring to the 1933 reductions, “a complete collapse in prices would have taken place.” It may be difficult to prove that the saving of the market was due entirely to restrictions, but there is certainly a case for the contention that tlie quota played a big part in the result. When the board views the prices ruling prior to the imposition of the quota and compaa*es them with those ruling to-day, it has more than a shadow of right to claim that New Zealand has benefited from the meat import restrictions. Moreover, Mr Jones, who returned only last week from the Old Country, feels so optimistic about the future that he warns producers against forward sell-

mg. The meat position, can reasonably ho expected to cause dairymen to pause and consider the possibility of a beneficial price-rise following upon a cheese quota. In their fear of the consequences of a quota upon the expansion of production many dairymen have failed to visualise the prospect of an improved market at Home —and yet a market improvement means more to the average individual personally than the “development of the vast resources of the country,” to use a favourite phrase of politicians’ which has been very much upon the lips of farmers lately. Without a desire to belittle the public spirit of those who take this long view, it is still possible to wonder why the farmer should be more anxious about expansion at any price than, about a fair return for his present outimt. There is admittedly a problem to he faced in the disposal of surplus x>roduotion, but there is surely comfort to be gained from the fact that- the whole object of the quota is to return a better price at once to the man who is farming the land now—and also from the reflection that it would, not need a huge price increase to compensate for a ten per cent, reduction in output. The, cheese position, is not, admittedly, on all fours with the meat trade, for the Dominion supplies a bigger proportion of England’s cheese than of her meat (of all classes) and might, in consequence, ho called upon to stand a heavier reduction of cheese. The fact remains, however, that there are two sides to the quota picture—and in New Zealand too many people have been refusing to look at any other than the reverse side. The application of quantitative restrictions to meat, bacon, apples and even t*ggs should, make it apparent to evevyono that Great Britain is definitely committed to the restrictive principle. New Zealand may “stand pat” for the two years which still have to expire under the Ottawa Agreement, but it is too much to hope, or expect, that the cheese industry will be accorded different treatment than the other vast interests represented in meat, bacon, fruit and eggs, to name only some of the primary industries which have already been brought within the scope of the quota principle.