THE MEAT POOL.

New Zealand Herald, Volume LVIII, Issue 17978, 31 December 1921, Page 6

THE MEAT POOL.

Several of the weightiest objections to the meat pool scheme as at first outlined are met by the Prime Minister's latest statement. Mr. Massey makes- it clear that the control of the pool will remain with producers. This is very important because experience has proved conclusively that bureaucracy has no instinct for business. The mismanagement of the British food supplies, of which the latest example is the accumulation of butter, should warn the Government against interfering with the conduct of the pool, or indeed exercising any control beyond the minimum required to safeguard the national interests involved. It should also warn producers against any attempt to corner the market or indulge in monopolistic practice. It may be advisable at times to take extraordinary action to prevent the markets becoming glutted, but the general policy should be to reduce the world's surplus of meat as quickly as possible and thereafter permit trade to take its natural course. The less the pool disturbs existing arrangements the more successful it is likely to be. Mr. Massey has met a rather strained of expropriation raised in interested circles in London by saying that New Zealand business will, as far as possible, be left in the hands of the present London agents. He has also met the natural reluctance which freezing companies with world-famous brands feel against having the identity of their meat lost in the mass. This concession of the right to retain particular brands should go a long way toward winning support for the scheme, and it is justified by the incentive it will offer the companies to maintain a high standard of quality. There are doubtless many other matters, both of principle and detail, which require careful consideration and revision, but the case for some such control as Mr. Massey suggests remains very strong. The fact that the New Zealand producer receives less than half the London price of his meat is conclusive evidence that freights and storage charges are too high. The Government has put forward a scheme which promises some relief. If producers are wise'they will allow themselves to be swayed neither by prejudice nor by sentiment, but will take the scheme as a basis for examining the whole machinery of export and marketing with a view to effecting economies. It can scarcely be argued that there is no room for saving.