THE MEAT TRADE.

Northern Advocate, 17 January 1920, Page 3

THE MEAT TRADE.

STOCKS IN THE STORES

POSITION TN THE OLD COUNTRY

THE CASE FOR DE-CONTROL

Interesting information concerning the stocks of frozen meat in London is contained in a letter received by Messrs M. A. Eliott and Co. of Pa l - merston North, from Messrs Gilbert Anderson and Co., Ltd., of London. It is pointed out that, quite the reverse of supplies being short, the difficulty is that the demand is not nearly sufficient to clear the daily pitchings on Smithfield, even home-killed hanging fire at and to-day, the storage position at Home is becoming as acute as it was in New Zealand at the early part of last year. Undoubtedly an error of judgment was made when the Ministry of Food put up the price of imported meat in October, and it soon had to admit the mistake by again reducing the price of mutton and lamb to the level in operation prior to the rise referred to," remark Messrs Anderson and Co. "The position as we saw it was not to impose further restrictions, but to remove as far as possible those already in existence. We accordingly pressed for the withdrawal of the registration of customers with particular butchers, and the removal of the restrictions limiting the quantity that could be purchased by customers. Meantime, the British Incorporated Society of Meat Importers had the matter in hand and the society called a general meeting of its members on the 17th inst., (November, 1919) to discuss the situation. As the outcome a letter has been forwarded to the Food Controller, the principal part of which reads as follows: — "The members beg to submit that in their opinion the"time has now come for the removal of control over the imported meat trade; and that the first steps in de-control should be: (1) The return to the system in force hefore control was instituted of selling meat freely through agents, in lieu of the present system. (2) The withdrawal of regulations compelling customers to register with a particuar retailer. (3) The removal of all restrictions as to quantities purchased by the public' So far as (1) is concerned, we do not think the official mind is made up. and at present the Treasury holds the whip, whilst the British farmer is the power that wields it None the less, we consider that if (2) and (3) can <be brought into operation a start will have been made in the right direction; at the same time it is doubtful whether anything will be actually accomplished until the New Year."

A SERIOUS PROBLEM

Awompanying the letter from Messrs Anderson and Co. is an article from the London "Star" of November 10 dealing with the meat position. "At the present moment," says the "Star," "there are over a million carcasses of meat —mostly mutton — heading for England. There are also in the Thames, awaiting discharge, ships with over 35,000 tons of meat on board. There is available cold storage space for only 5000 tons, so that it is clear that the problem which the Food Ministry has to face is indeed a serious one. In Smithfield it is an.open secret that the heads of the meat section of the Ministry of Food are at their wits' end to know how to deal with the situation, and it is not surprising to find that there is to be from to-day a reduction of 2d per lb on imported mutton and lamb. It is also officially announced that the 2s ration per head is a minimum and not a maximum quantity, and that butchers may serve their registered customers with any quantity of beef or mutton they may desire if they have sufficient supplies. To all intents and purposes the rationing of meat is for the mement practically suspended in the hope that the public will save the situation by eating more. It seems high time that the whole question of meat control was brought before the House of Commons; and that the rumours which are going around the trade should be answered once and for all. The wholesale trade is almost unanimously agreed that control of meat should be aboilshed at once, and that if this were done there would be a fall of 6d per lb on the cheaper imported joints and 4d per lb on the dearer cuts. In the Port of London alone nearly 30 vessels carrying frozen meat are expected during this month. Smithfield is totally opposed to the opinion held by Mr McCurdy that the removal of control and restrictions would involve a substantial risk, at no distant date, of enhanced prices for meat in all the markets of the world. It is pointed out that in Australia and New Zjealand alone there are oven ten million carcasses awaiting shipment, in addition to large stocks in Brazil and South Africa, and that while there is a shortage of' nearly a million sheep in Great Britain this is more than balanced by the live cattte which are above the normal.

"The present high price of meat is the cause of only 75 per cent, of the rationed allowance being taken up, and under the methods of distribution put in force by the Food Ministry, joints which the poor cannot afford are being forced on working-class areas, while butchers in the better class districts cannot obtain sufficient of the choicer joints demanded by their customers. . . . There are also rumours in Smithfield that the Ministry are about to enter into another contract with the American Beef Trust for the output from the Argentine at 8d per l'b. It is stated that this contract was to have been signed last week, but that in view of the present alarming situation the contract has not yet been actually entered into. If control is to be abolished means will have to be found to compensate the British farmer, and it is stated in Smithfield that it is this trouble which is the crux of the whole business. It is causing the Treasury to

compel the Food Controller to continue the control. . • . In Smithfield it is suggested that should the price of home-killed meat fall below the agreed price with the farmer, it would pay the Government to cut their losses and face the situation by paying the farmer out of taxation the difference between what he would get under control and what he actually sells at. It is estimated by competent men in the trade that this would cost the Treasury between four and five million pounds, from which would have to be deducted the expenses of the meat control. There would also have to be set against this sum the drop in the price of meat from 4d to 6d per lb, which would benefit the whole of the community. The case for de-control presented by the meat trade is such a strong one, and the present position of imported meat is so serious, that it is high time the matter was brought before the House of Commons < and the cards on both sides were laid on th.c table."