MILK CRISIS AT HOME

Poverty Bay Herald, Volume LXI, Issue 18386, 2 May 1934, Page 10

MILK CRISIS AT HOME

DOMINIONS BLAMED “NEW ZEALANDER’S” REPLY COMMONWEALTH’S POWER LONDON, March 23. Agricultural correspondents of London newspapers continue to attack the Dominions when writing on the subject of milk marketing. The -Milk Marketing Board lias expressed dissatisfaction with the price fixed lor summer milk by the .arbitrators, and the agricultural correspondent of the Morning Post proceeds to analyse the situation. Part of his article reads as follows: — “.liufortiiiiately for the British dairy farmer, the Ottawa Agreements have given the Dominion farmer the unrestricted right of free entry of his dairy produce for throe years from August 21, 1932. and nothing but a voluntary restriction, which Mr. Baxter, the chairman of the Milk Board, visited New Zealand to endeavor to effect, can help the home producer until August 21, 1935. It is to be hoped that fresh terms will then be made, which will, at any rate, permit of remunerative sale of the milk and milk products at present produced in this country, together with a reasonable expansion in accordance with the principle, above enunciated, of first call on the home market for home produce.

“So far we have heard nothing of such voluntary restriction on the part of the Dominion fanners, and my information is that dairy produce is being sold in the Dominions at a much higher price than it is in this country. In other words, by the action of the Dominion Governments, the Dominion, farmer gets a remunerative price in his own home market and is free to dump his surplus products into this country at lower prices. “Any home Government assistance that may he given in this country will merely take the form of a. countersubsidy to bring back the (nice of dairy produce to its economic level. Further than this, any import duty or quota regulation of non-Dominion dairy supplies, though eminently desirable, and indeed recommended by the Commission, might only result in still more supplies being poured in by the Dominions for £he remainder of their period of free entry. “Whatevea - may be the benefit derived from the imports of all this glut, the grim fact remains that it is. killing tlic dairy-farming industry in this country, aiid the British farmer will not be comforted by any measures taken to prevent him being strangled by the foreigner if his throat is being cut by a Dominion producer. It is too long to wait till August, 1935. “To sum up, the dairy industry, for which .this country is so eminently suited by Nature, and which is worth £55,CC0,0C0 per annum, is being most seriously jeopardised by the glut of dairy piodu.ee imported under the Ottawa Agreements, which do not end: until August, 1.935.” At the beginning of the article the writer states that foreign and Dominion importations of butter, cheese, and condensed milk represents a milk production of no less than 2,185,000,000 gallons, while the home production of milk and milk products amounts to about 1,263,.000,000 gallons per annum. This is the only mention of foreign competition, and It is billy natural that a protest should be made against this biased statement.

50 PER CENT. FOREIGN ‘•New Zealander,” in a letter to the Morning Post to-day, says:— “Your agricultural correspondent definitely tries to put the blame for a glutted market in milk, produc ts on the shoulders of the Dominions. He has. no ill. word of foreign suppliers. Apparently he does not realise that at the present time nearly 50 per cent, of the butter imported into Britain comes from foreign nations. Is this fair to the Dominions, who are still amongst this country’s best -customers —indeed, New Zealand leads the world in her per capita purchase of British goods: “Your correspondent is again in error in stating (according to information supplied to him) ‘that dairy produce is being sold in the Dominions at a much higher price than it is in this country; in other words, by the action of the Dominion Governments the Dominion farmer gets a remunerative price in his own home market and is free to dump his surplus products into this country at lower prices.’ “In New Zealand to-day butter is being sold on London market parity; its retail price in the shops there is the same as here. The New Zealand farmer gets no bounty in the way suggested If your correspondent would talk to Mr. Runciman about his agreement with Denmark, which still permits that country to send more butter and to get a bigger cheque from Britain than the little Dominion of New Zealand, it would be doing a useful service to the Empire.”