CANTERBURY FRUITGROWERS

Otago Witness, Issue 3870, 15 May 1928, Page 10

CANTERBURY FRUITGROWERS

TOMATOES FROM THE ISLANDS. DITY REQUESTED ON APPLES. CHRISTCHT RCII, May 9. Allegations of unfair competition from the Cook Islands in regard to the imports of tomatoes were made by a deputation from the Christchurch Tomato and Stonefruit Growers’ Association which waited on Canterbury members of Parliament this morning The deputation urged that restrictions should be placed on the importation of Island tomato’s during the months of November and Docember. It was stated that in the Christchurch disti ict there were JOO owners, with a total of 490 glasshouses. The amount of capital smk in the industry was. approximately. £272,133 2s. At times the prices received were, below the cost of production, out of which commission and tiansport charges ha J to be met at a cost of lOd a lb. It was suggested that restrictions be placed on Cook Island tomatoes during the months of November and December, and that for the protection of the public al! imported tomatoes, when exposed for sale, should be marked with the place of origin. It was stated that the Auckland growers were supporting the request for restrictions. Another . deputation from the Canterbury Fruitgrower. l ;’ Association urged that the duty on imported apples bo increased to 2d a lb all the year round The importations, it was stared, were affecting the sale of apples from the local cool stores. II. Holland. M.P.: Can you supply the New Zealand market all the year round? Mr F. Sisson : Me vc more than enougta apples to supply the New Zealand market. In reply to the chairman (Mr D. G. Sullivan, M.P.), Mr Sisson said that if th" duty were increased the price of the local apples would not be increased. Mr Holland said that the retailers complained that the New Zealand fruitgrowers shipped all their first-grade apples to London, and left only the lower grade apples for local consumption. That was said to be the reason why the New Zealand apples were neglected.

Mr Sisson said there was something in what Mr Holland had said, but it did not apply to Canterbury, which was not an exporting district. If the duty on imported apples was increased the firstgrade local apples would be kept for home consumption.

In reply to Sir Heaton Rhodes, Mr Sisson said that Canterbury growers were not receiving the benefit of the Government subsidy on the export of apples. It was not a fact that all the best fruit was exported. Mr Sisson also said that the fruitgrowers were only asking for an increase in duty on American apples.