THE GOVERNMENT AND THE MEAT TRADE.

New Zealand Times, Volume LXXIV, Issue 4978, 30 May 1903, Page 4

THE GOVERNMENT AND THE MEAT TRADE.

the announcement made by the London “Daily Express” is not hy any means a surprise to the public, which the Premier took into his confidence in-the summer, and reminded a second time more recently by his reply to the proposals of a certain American shipping company, those utterances prepared the public for the practical intervention of the Government of the country in the meat trade, for the purpose of improving the price to the consumer by broadening tho area of consumption. That it, is,a bold policy has been the commonplace of conversation ever since it was announced here; Bub, bold as it is, it is not to be compared in hardihood to making a law for the suppression of combines and rings; The latter being ah impossibility, the hardihood of its inception is almost entitled to be coupled with a Certain epithet denounced in tho Gospel. On the other hand, the policy of taking the trade out of the hands of rings and combines is perfectly easy of accomplishment, and is, for the public benefit which it offers, commendably bold. . Wo are not here referring to any organisations known to the meat trade on bur side of the water. The meat rings at the other side are the controllers of our trade; To them its profits are consecrated by a custom which ho nian understands, and no man can contest. It may be true that the local organisations, which undertake the preparation of our meat for the market and its conveyance there, have unwittingly played into the hands of the rings which keep the trade down and threaten to choko it—played into these hands owing to the want of foresight, qf cooperative instinct, of enterprise, of, in a word, many of the qualities necessary for the heroic forwarding of a great public industry. It may be. also, that they are handicapped by lack of power to properly control and direct the enormous business in their hands; but it is not to them that the main drawbacks of the meat industry are to bo imputed. The vested interests on the other side bf the water are the chief, and, it may be said, the only offenders; and to them—organised in rings that fly no colours and advertise iib names —tho life-blood of our most promising and profitable industry goes. To ignore those rings is far easier than to endeavour to abolish them by laws through which all rings can drive the proverbial coach and sis. But tho only

organisation strong enough to carry the ignoring policy to triumphant success is a Government. The task is quite beyond private enterprise. Logically, moreover, a Government which controls already part of the export trade may control more, if not the whole. Further, Government being above competition of particular products, is the best authority to safeguard them all. ■ ' . . The second advantage offered by the now departure is the distribution of the product. It is twenty years since tnis trade began, and still there is no distribution worth}' of the name. Practically, the efforts of the contrbllers of this trade are confined to brio centre of population out of many. There are in Groat Britain at least nine large centres, and the main bulk of the frozen meat of this country is consigned to one of them. Our rivals of the Argentine are, bn the other haqd, exploiting all these centres with vigour and success. They are improving their product by leaps and bounds; their freezing and transport arrangements arb in every way at least equal to ours; and as for their sale arrangements, they have established a unity of interest and a directness of action far beyond anything we can boast of. It was for some years the fashion to make light of this competition, relying on the superiority of our product; but. as their output is improving in quality, and is Likely to be .overwhelming in quantity, if is high time to have done with sneers and to take up the work of vigorous competition. The best way to do that, undoubtedly, is to meet the enemy along the whole line of competition, before the difference between our product and his is annulled by the improvement of the latter. Private enterprise having failed again, if is right for the public interest to be pushed by the Government which directly represents that interest. f , The third advantage js that, the merits of the meat will bo brought before the consumer. Somebody buys oilr mek.t how, and all our meat; bub libw much of it is bought as Now Zealand produce? That question is almost as difficult to' answer as another question closely allied to it. What proportion of tiro millions of meat consumers firmly believe that the frozen meat of the colonies is unfit even fOr consumption, in the prisons of Great Britain? The discussion of these questions opens out endless prospect of debate. Bub there’ is grave- reason for believing that the Now Zealand produce suffers greatly frflni the ignorance of the consuming public oh the other side of .the water. The best argument is supplied by the old adage' about the proof of the pudding. The only way to get the people to eat is to show them the meat oh the hooks wailing to he taken away, wrapped up in the newspapers that abuse it. Once they have been tempted by price and appearance to eat, they will eat again, until in the course of time the meat of New Zealand will sell readily on its merits, in any quantity in which we can produce it, and faf the price the producer will get the possible maximum share. . Of course, Governments must, to make the most of their undoubtedly superior advantages, have Organisation and business capacity. Their equipment in these is a matter whereof the judgment must be left to time. As to the object of the present .new departure there cannot be two opinions. » ■