THE New Zealand Herald AND DAILY SOUTHERN CROSS WEDNESDAY, JULY 8, 1936 BRITISH MEAT POLICY

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXXIII, Issue 22465, 8 July 1936, Page 12

THE New Zealand Herald AND DAILY SOUTHERN CROSS WEDNESDAY, JULY 8, 1936 BRITISH MEAT POLICY

The British Government's policy with respect to home-produced and imported meat can be viewed by New Zealand with qualified satisfaction. AI? explained to the House of Commons by the Minister of Agriculture, it represents a distinct advance on the terms placed before the Dominions in the AVhite Paper issued .16 months ago. At that time Mr. Elliot asked the Dominions to agree to an import levy, the proceeds to be devoted to subsidising their British competitors. In default of agreement, the British Government would proceed to impose "drastic" quotas on imports. Neither alternative was acceptable, and Mr. Lyons for Australia and Mr. Coates for New Zealand proceeded to London and succeeded in negotiating satisfactory temporary agreements. Both they and Mr. Elliot were* anxious, however, to reach a more permanent basis so that the various producers and traders would know where they stood and make arrangements accordingly. Mr. Elliot has been working on this problem for the last year. It has become apparent that the British Government has required him to take into account, not only the interests directly involved/ but those of the British consumer. British standards of nutrition were not to be sacrificed in order to protect the producer. So, as he explained to the Commons, Mr. Elliot has proceeded "on the basis of a regulated market with maximum supplies for the consumer consistent with a reasonable level of remuneration for the producer." New Zealand and the other Dominions cannot fairly complain of the manner in which Mr. Elliot proposes to apply his policy. The threat of the levy is entirely removed from Empire meat, although it is to be imposed on foreign chilled and frozen beef and veal. Thus Dominion cattle raisers gain an important preference. No levy is proposed on mutton and lamb imports from any source, although in this department the Dominions possess a valuable quantitative preference which appears likely to be perpetuated. On the other hand all meat imports are to be subjected to quotas. As the Dominions have already accepted these voluntarily, and as the restrictions are not expected to prove onerous in their case, this side of the bargain need not cause much hesitation. The quantities have not yet been fixed and the settling of this detail may involve close negotiation. If quotas are arranged at " recent Jevels," the phrase used by Mr. Elliot, New Zealand should not at present have much difficulty in keeping within them. The question of future expansion may be more difficult to answer. On this score, however, there is some expectation that, while Britain intends to restrict aggregate imports to recent levels, she may allot a larger proportion of the aggregate to the Dominions. If that is the intention, then the Dominions are to be treated most generously by the British Government, and they should not be slow to reciprocate. Let them consider by contrast the position of Argentina, whose beef, mutton and lamb exports to Britain have already been cut by 10 up to 35 per cent, whose great beef trade is shortly to be subject to a levy, and which faces the prospect of more severe quotas. The Imperial bias given to British meat policy is all the more impressive in view of her large trade and financial interests in Argentina. Mr. Elliot hopes that the regulation of imports, with the universally desired object of securing a stable market, will be undertaken by an Empire Meat Council, representing British and Dominion suppliers, in conjunction with an International Meat Conference, representative of Empire and foreign suppliers. The success of such bodies will depend on how much they are expected to do. It is clear, in the first place, that they could not be expected to impose self-denying ordinances as to supplies upon themselves. Britain will have to assume responsibility for fixing the maximum, and, fortunately for suppliers, must do so by reference to the needs of her consumers. Not much better success could be expected in council or conference if, the maximum having been fixed, the various national representatives were asked to agree on their respective quotas. Here again Britain will have to determine the proportions. The new bodies could still perform a useful function by arranging to spread supplies over the year so that the Smithfield and other markets were not subjected to scarcities or gluts. That would help to secure the market stability which all would join vith Mr. Elliot in declaring to be desirable. The functions of these new bodies and of much else in the British policy require closer definition. Meanwhile New Zealand can rejoice at the retention of a free market for meat and need not repine unduly at the moderate supply restrictions which go with it. i