THE MEAT TRADE.

Manawatu Standard, Volume LIX, Issue 69, 18 February 1939, Page 11

THE MEAT TRADE.

EFFECT OF REDUCTION. OPINIONS IN SOUTH. Per Press Association. CHRISTCHURCH, Eeb. 17. The seriousness of the British Government’s reduction by 3 per cent on last year’s importation of Dominion frozen meat was suggested in figures quoted this evening by Mr H. D. Acland, president of the New Zealand Sheepowners’ Federation. He said that the position would be fully discussed at an early meeting of the Meat Board. The first comment made by Mr Acland was that the restriction appeared to be based on last year’s tonnage. That was tho lowost fer New Zealand since the Ottawa Agreement was made. Under the Ottawa Agreement New Zealand was allowed 195,000 tons, with 5000-ton increases. Last year the tonnage was 185,000, and the Dominion was, under the new regulations, to be cut 3 per cent on the 185,000 tons. The second point made by Mr Acland was that the restriction was placed on tonnage, not on numbers of carcases. Last year tho average weight of New Zealand lambs was more than lib below that in 1936. The average weight was under 331 b and two years ago more than 341 b. In 1938, 9,000,000 quarters wore exported. “It cannot, for a moment, be seriously contended that the fall in prices in England was caused bv increased supplies from New Zealand,” Mr Acland said. “Restriction on Australia and New Zealand jointly running into, say, 8000 tons of mutton and lamb cannot possibly affect prices in England.” PRODUCTION FACTOR. “The reduction may not be seriously effective,” commented Mr W. W. Mnlholland, president of the New Zealand Farmers’ Union. The effect probably would not be serious this year. The consequences to the Dominion of the restriction would depend on the ultimate production, said Mr MulholJand. Indications had been that there would be some slight falling off in production. “I do not think that 3 per cent, will l>e regarded as being a heavy reduction,” he said. “Whether it is light or heavy depends on the season. If production gains 10 per cent., then all our produce cannot be sold.” A reply was made by Mr Mtilliolland to a statement by Mr E. W, Gough, a former New Zealand farmer, who is now a member of the English National Farmers’ Union, that “he expected the application of quotas against each of the Dominions and colonies on the lines suggested at the Empire Producers’ Conference in Sydney, the leader of which (Sir Reginald Dorman-Long) was the new Minister of Agriculture.” “Nothing was suggested by the conference in Sydney of anv quota against the Dominions,” said Mr Mulholland. “Either Mr Gough’s remark was misunderstood or liis reference is to what the British delegation suggested, but which was not agreed to by the conference. The British delegation agreed to the finding of the conference, which deliberately omitted all reference to restriction, quota, any form of import duty, and so on.” NEED FOR CO-OPERATION. MR POLSON’S VIEW. . Per Press Association. WELLINGTON. Feb. 18. Tthe announcement of the reduction of meat export quotas should cause every New Zealander to think deeply, said Mr W. J- Poison, the president of the New Zealand Primary and Ancillary Industries Producers’ Council, in an interview. Everything predicted by the British delegation at the meeting of the Empire Producers’ Council in Sydney had come true, and it was now quite evident that Sir Reginald Dorman-Smith’s statement at that time had expressed the views of the British Government. The British delegation had agreed that if the Dominions consented to co-operate in the commodity council scheme to regulate shipments British farmers would do their utmost to avoid restrictions on Dominion produce. “The Dominions failed to grasp the opportunity, and it may now be too late,” said Mr Poison. “The New Zealand delegation at Sydney scored a great victory in obtaining a scheme where restrictions were not envisaged by the British delegates, and obtained a great moral advantage for New Zealand in the offer of a separate commodity council for mutton and lamb. This advantage should have been followed up. and it may not be too late yet to obtain it.” In Mr Poison’s opinion New Zealand should endeavour to work in with the new Minister of Agriculture, since he had given his word that in that case he would try to avoid restrictions. Mr Poison said he was sure the new restrictions were not retaliation for the iniport control, but a result of New Zealand’s failure to take the steps which the British Government had hinted in the broadest possible manner it considered necessary to preserve the stability not only of the British farmers but of Empire agriculture.