THE PROPOSED GOVERNMENT MEAT POOL.

Otago Daily Times, Issue 18444, 4 January 1922, Page 8

THE PROPOSED GOVERNMENT MEAT POOL.

Producers everywhere are beginning to realise the weaknesses and dangers ot the compulsory meat pool. When the scheme was first launched; it was welcomed by sheep farmers, who were feeling acutely the painful process of the world-wide economic adjustments as reflected in the lowered values of Now Zealand produce. They appreciated the good intentions which prompted the Government to do something to try to meet the position, and said so. Subsequent critical examination of the scheme as announced, however, revealed the fact that the intention was to forte all producers to put their meat through a compulsory pool, and to receive payment in the nature of an advance of a proportion of the value of the meat as assessed by the Board of Control in charge of the pool. In effect, this plan will eliminate the competition of the exporters who have been in the habit of bidding for fat stock, and will deny the grower who wishes it the right to sell his fat lambs and sheep in the best market. It is unofficially explained that the Government has no intention of preventing the exporter from buying; but, it is certain that, whatever stock an exporter may buy, ho will be forced to put it into the pool, at the pool advance price, and exporters are definitely saying that 'under these circumstances they cannot operate and leave the moat they buy to bo subject to the tender mercies of a pool which is beyond their control, and under the control of a board which assuredly will know very little of marketing conditions at Home, and which will almost certainly make great losses in selling the meat. As the Government, in financing this scheme, has .decided that, *in the event of losses being made, the producers who have received the advances must refund the loss, there is much uncertainty in the public mind, and the opinion is being freely expressed that a straight-out price would be far better than advances “with reeburso against.the producer.’’ The question is being asked why a compulsory pool is necessary; and why the Government does not agree to a voluntary pool available for those who wish to take advantage of it, and leaving all free to choose to whom they will sell. The arguments in favour of the latter course appear to be overwhelming; oil the benefits which the scheme desires will bo available under it, free from the grave disadvantages of thp, first scheme, which, at the moment, seeiii-heavy enough to sink it. —Advt. , .