THE QUOTA POSITION

Manawatu Standard, Volume LIII, Issue 254, 23 September 1933, Page 11

THE QUOTA POSITION

RELATIONS WITH BRITAIN. HISTORY OF THE SCHEME. Per Press Association. NEW PLYMOUTH, Sept. 22. “In view of the fact that you and the Prime Minister have covered fairly fully most of the questions affecting the World Conference, trade, commerce and education, have you anything to say with regard to the World Conference in its relation more directly to the question of a system of quotas generally being applied in different parts of the world?” That question was put last night to Hon. R. Masters (Minister of Industries and Commerce) when lie returned to Stratford aftdr his visit to Great Britain as one of New Zealand’s representatives to the conference. The question of quotas was a very prominent one before the Conference, and was dealt with by the delegates appointed to the Economic Committee. Mr Masters said the Conference was divided into two sections —monetary on the one side and economic on the other. “While the Prime Minister represented the Dominion on the monetary side, I was the representative on the economic, and on the special committee set up to deal with the question of co-ordination of production and marketing. “I do not think there is anyone who deludes himself into believing that the Woidd Conference was a success, measured by definite agreements and tangible results. At the same time, however, there were many elements of value. If the problems can be solved, they will have a most important bearing upon the future of this Dominion. “The New Zealand delegation was particularly concerned with discus sions relating to the supply and mar keting of farm products. I will refer to these, with particular reference to butter, though if the full story of the quota discussions were told it would cover a long list of commodities. France, for instance, raised the problems of co-ordination of production and marketing, and mentioned wheat, wool, wine, coal, timber, copper, silver, and cotton. Other delegations brought forward proposals in regard to coffee, and cocoa, all cereals, livestock, sugar, tobacco, dates, tin, and dairy produce. PRODUCTION REGULATION. 1 “Before discussing any product in detail, the Conference endeavoured to reach an agreement concerning the .principles that should govern the regulation of production. “The United Kingdom Ministers, who were amongst the strongest supporters of the principle of quantitative regulation, drafted a set of rules and these were adopted at the Conference. Dairy products were not dealt with in the same detail as some other commodities. Regulations were ' submitted in keeping with the trend towards the regulation of supplies in favour oi setting up ail International Dairy Council. “New Zealand took the view that this international control council would bo premature. The closing stages of the Conference were fast approaching when this was under discussion, and nothing binding was entered into so far as dairy products are concerned, but in regard i;o all farm products the strength of the move towards quantitative control, and the approach to unanimity amongst all the importing countries, were features to be noted. ' BRITISH MOVEMENT. “More immediately significant than the trend of general discussions at the World Economic Conference is the movement in the United Kingdom which at the present time looks towards quantitative regulation as desirable. The Agricultural Marketing Acts, 1931 and 1933, give to the farmers the right to organise and regulate the supply of products. A scheme may ho drawn up to cover any products, and when it lias been approved it binds all produce quantities, and prices may be fixed under the scheme. “Of direct concern to all countries that supply the United Kingdom market is the power given by the 1933 Act for the regulation of the volume of imports. “Schemes of control in the United Kingdom have been drawn up for pigs and bacon, milk and milk products, and potatoes. Furthermore, wheat is dealt with under a quota, and sugar, beet and hops have control schemes. With regard to fish, action has been taken to regulate tlie quantity allowed on the market. Regarding _ fat stock, a reorganisation Commisison (concerned with beef, mutton and lamb) is now sitting, and the Government has announced its intention of setting up a reorganisation Connnision regarding eggs and poultry. “These references to legislation and to the control schemes that are under way are a good indication as to the extensive action being taken and liow wide the powers are for the quantitative regulation of- supplies of farm produce in the markets of the United Kingdom. In daily produce the powers of the United Kingdom to regulate imports are subject for three years to the Ottawa Agreement. For that period (counting from 1932) the United Kingdom Government has undertaken not to limit the volume of dairy produce imports from New Zealand and the other Dominions. CONNECTION WITH OTTAWA. “While there has been strong inclination in the United Kingdom towards regulating the volume of imports which are argued to bo in over-supply, there has not been any suggestion of departing from the Ottawa Agreement, except by arrangement with the Dominions. “There has been a great deal of discussion in New Zealand in regard to the quota problem, and I should like to mention one or two points in connection therewith. Firstly, the value of the Ottawa Agreement. Those who are most insistent on the value of a free market, and who are most severely critical of any suggestion for even examining the arguments in favour of the quota, should acknowledge from their point of view the importance of the agreement concluded at Ottawa. Were it not for this agreement the free market would not be guaranteed; it would not be for us to elioose whether there should be a quota. Secondly, in regard to the New Zealand Customs tariff and the quota, as clearly as could be the United Kingdom lias stated that our New Zealand tariff lias no bearing on the quota, and this is equally true in regard to the exchange rate. There were lengtlily discussions and prolonged negotiations between the Dominions’ representatives and the United Kingdom Ministers. DIFFICULT POSITION. “The question simply bristles with difficulties, ono of the greatest of which is the impossibility of separating butter and cheese, and it is cheese that the United Kingdom farmers are particularly anxious to have brought within a comprehensive scheme of control. The farmers in the United Kingdom are taking this matter very seriously, as is indicated by the fact that the salaries of the general manager and some of the other chief executive officers of the milk control scheme are from £SOOO to £7500 per annum. “We recognise, and producers in New Zealand will recognise, the importance of keeping the goodwill of

the' United Kingdom. Difficulties can be best overcome by discussion, and we took the view that this is a farmers’ problem in leaving the matter open.

“In not agreeing to the quota proposals, the New Zeala-nd Ministers in London took notice of the principle stressed by the British Ministers and agreed to by the World Economic Conference, viz., any scheme (this .affirmed) should, in the first instance, command a general measure of assent amongst exporting countries, and within these countries a substantial majority of the producers themselves. “Whatever else was to be said for or against the quota, New Zealand representatives in London had to take notice of the very strongly expressed opposition in the Dominion to the suggested quota on dairy produce. Accepting the view that it is a farmers’ problem, we extended an invitation to the National Farmers’ Union of Great Britain to send direct representatives to New Zealand. Hence the visit of Mr Baxter, who arrived in New Zealand yesterday, with the object of going fully into the problem of tlie entry of our dairy produce into the United Kingdom with representatives of our farming industry.” RECONCILIATION WITH OTTAWA. Per Press Association. PAHIATUA, Sept. 22. Mr 11. J. Wernham, director of the Co-operative Wool Marketing Association, stated that lie could not reconcile statements made by Mr Thomas Baxter that the British Government is committed to quotas and the definite statement by the British delegates to the Ottawa Conference who had mado it plain that preference would be given to Empire production on the British markets. Mr Wernham said that as far as this country knew tho British Government was committed at present only to the agreement made at tliq conference. Quotas within the Empire were not included in the agreement. Prominent lines of production under review were butter and bacon, yet agreements covering these commodities had been entered into with Denmark which would place that counry in a preferential position to the Dominion if any system of quota were imposed. Immediately Denmark had a minor restriction placed on her exports to England her currency was lowered by a large increase in her exchange, so on the basis of her enormous supply to the Home market, if the question of dumping could be raised, Denmark, with her higher exchange rate, was the greater delinquent. -Notwithstanding contracts had been entered into with that country, with the Argentine, and with outlier countries outside the Empire, whoso trade balances were not nearly as favourable to Great Britain as that of New Zealand.