MEAT SUPPLIES

Southland Times, Issue 19458, 23 January 1925, Page 5

MEAT SUPPLIES

EVIDENCE FROM VESTEYS. SOME PLAIN SPEAKING. THE BRITISH INQUIRY. (By Telegraph.—Press Assn. —Copyright). (Reuter’s Telegrams.) LONDON, January 21. Lord Vestey (a director of the Union Cold Storage Company ), in giving evidence before the Food Commission, stated that the Union Cold Storage Company owned about 450,000 cattle in South America, South Africa and Australia. Most of these cattle were in the Northern Territory of Australia, where at present they had over 60,000 ready for killing, but they were unable to kill them owing to the excessive cost of labour and other handling conditions ; consequently the meat works at Port Darwin had been closed for three years. IN THE NORTHERN TERRITORY. It was a criminal situation, said Lord Vestey, that at present it was more profitable to let cattie die on the stations than to put them through the Port Darwin meat works. Vast resources were lost to the Empire for three years largely owing to the apparent indifference of all the parties concerned. When they were operating the works they complained to the Australian Government of the ruinous conditions, but the labour conditions throughout Australia were then so serious that the Government could do nothing. They were not blaming the Australian Government. They were the only people who had ever made a serious effort to develop the cattle industry in the Northern Territory, and if they were given real support by the Australian people there was no place in the British Empire where the expenditure of a portion of the £1,000,000 Government subsidy to the colonies could result in such an immediate return in the form of an increase of beef export. Lord Vestey mentioned that during the last season in which they worked at Darwin the cost of the operating work and putting the meat fJ>. on steamer was over £lO per head, compared with £1 15/- in the River Plate. This was owing to the fact that wages in Australia were high, the hours shorter, and the work not so good. the price control. Lord Vestey declared that there was an absolutely free market for cattle. The accusation that they com rolled the price of meat was absurd and wholly untrue. They were unable in any way to control the price. It was solely a question of supply and demand. The root cause of the present price of beef, which was fairly cheap compared with other commodities, was that the Continent was now taking large quantities, equal to about 1/250,000 cattle in 1924, compared with nothing in pre-war days. There was an absolute shortage of meat, and no likelihood of lower prices in the near future. They had worked for the British public during the six months for nothing.

There was no shortage of cold storage in Great Britain, said Lord Vestey. The allegation that owing to the Vestey interests in cold storage bacon was rotting on the quay's at Liverpool was a downright lie. The statement that excessive cold storage charges was one of the principal causes of the rise in the price of meat was absurd. The company’s 2356 retail butchers’ shops in Britain showed a profit of under id per lb, without allowing interest on capital or depreciation. The cause of the increase in the price of meat was the price paid to the grower, amounting in the case of colonial mutton and lamb to over 100 per cent.

PRESS CRITICISM OF VESTEY’S. Lord Vestey said that in view of the continuous attacks upon those in the meat trade by the British and dominion Press, he welcomed the opportunity of pointing out the small margin on which their business was conducted. Sir Edmund Vestey quoted Mr H. P. Williams's report for private circulation in Australia, dealing with conditions in the Argentine. He pointed out that Mr Williams did not seek information from a single British firm in the Argentine. The whole of his informants were connected with the American Meat Trust. He added that the Vestey concern had not replied to attacks in the Press, of which hundreds had appeared in New Zealand, in view of the evidence now offered to the Commission. “It would be a nice thing,” witness added, “if the Commission were to give us a clean character.” Sir Auckland Geddes said: “We will see what we will do." Replying to the Commissioners, the Vestey Bros, admitted that the high labour costs at Darwin related exclusively to the war years, and admitted that they were partly due to the fact that the operations were necessarily seasonal. Workers had to be taken to and from Darwin from and to the south. They only handled 20 per cent, of the Argentine meat exports. COLONIAL MEAT DEARER. A commissioner pointed out that there was little cause for complaint about the advance of South American beef above prewar prices. Complaints centred around Australian and New Zealand mutton and lamb, the prices for which were now double prewar levels. Sir Gordon Campbell attended again, and said that after a careful perusal of the report of his previous evidence, he was not satisfied with his own replies, though these were accurate so far as they went, but he was afraid that he had not fully understood all the questions. He now realised that he should previously have requested a private session. The Commission privately examined Sir Gordon Campbell and both Lord and Sir Edward Vestey. Mr D. J. Owen (general manager of the Port of London Authority) said that the Authority was now considering the advisableness of reducing storage charges. He added that there was no monopoly of cold storage in London. The Port Authority owned about 50 per cent, of the storage space.