COMPARATIVE FREIGHTS

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXXIV, Issue 22754, 14 June 1937, Page 8

COMPARATIVE FREIGHTS

Bearing in mind that New Zealand produce for Britain has to bear increased freight rates, farmers may ask how it comes about that Australia has managed to arrange for substantial reductions estimated to save her primary producers £500,000 v a year. The three-year freight contract for dairy produce and meat concluded by the 'New Zealand Government and the Meat Board provided for an increase of two and a-half per cent and became operative on September 1 of last year. The rise was estimated to cost £60,000 a year. Two months later wool freights were raised, representing a further charge on primary industry. How comes it that New Zealand produce has to meet higher rates when, less than a year later, Australian gains a reduction 1 ? In explaining the rise to Otago farmers, Mr. James Begg, of the Meat Board, said the increase had to be conceded to the shipowners to compensate them for increased costs. First among the latter Mr. Begg mentioned the higher wages and shorter hours policy of the Government, which added to costs on the New Zealand coast. Another item was the reduction of seamen's hours by decision of the British Maritime Board. This charge, however, would fall on vessels trading to Australia as well as to New Zealand. Hence it appears to be clear that the Dominion's labour policy has not only prevented farmers obtaining concessions where Australia has succeeded in marked degree, but has also caused rates to bo increased. Nor are the new rates likely to be revised downward, to judge by the repeated expressions of dissatisfaction with labour service on the waterfront. A year ago New Zealand freights to Britain were generally lower than Australian. A part and perhaps the whole of that competitive advantage has now been lost by the producers, who must continue to sell in unsheltered world markets.;