FRUIT EXPORT

Southland Times, Issue 19896, 15 June 1926, Page 10

FRUIT EXPORT

PREFERENCE PRINCIPLE IMPERIAL ECONOMIC COMMITTEE’S REPORT « COMMENT BY SIR HENRY JONES. (Per United Press Association.) Nelson, June 12. Commenting on the Imperial Economic Committee’s fruit report Sir Henry Jones, of Henry Jones Co-operative Ltd., of Hobart, at present visiting Nelson, said that preference was a fine thing for the dominions but he did not think that a voluntary preference would be much good. The principle was all right but was not sufficiently concrete to get us very far. Sir Henry said he did not think that private preference either would accomplish much. “It would be,” he added, “a great thing for England if we could get preference on both sides. The only possible far reaching policy is a co-operative one based on mutual preference.” Sir Henry, who is evidently a firm believer in trading within the Empire, went on to say that if properly developed the dominions and colonies could grow sufficient fruit to meet all of Great Britain’s requirements and the work of production could easily absorb the million of unemployed at present on the dole in England. Let the unemployed emigrate and they could help to grow all the produce the United Kingdom could absorb. “Your apple crop in Nelson last season,” went on Sir Henry, “was about 550,000 cases, a very small proportion of the total trade, even the whole of your Dominion crop would be quite a negligible quantity. You have almost unlimited opportunities for expansion if you can be assured of a profitable export market. We load this season 42 ships in Tasmania with 2,200,000 cases of apples. This is nothing to what we could do if encouraged with preference. I will be very glad if I can co-operate with your growers and the association to promote the welfare of exporters to the Home market either by effecting straight out sales to buyers in England or making reasonable advances against all consignments on growers’ account. I pioneered this industry in Tasmania and am well acquainted with all requirements of the Home market. I see no reason why arrangements could not be made for direct, loading from Nelson. I understand it would be necessary to deepen the harbour entrance but this could be inquired into later and should not present any insuperable difficulties. In Tasmania it was stated that the apples are not precooled prior to shipment. As a rule they are packed and shipped within a week of being picked.” THE NEW PROPOSAL?. STATEMENT BY SECRETARY OF BOARD. (Special fa the Times J Wellington, June 12. The new proposals of the Fruit Export Control Board for the control of next season’s crop are not likely to be revealed in the immediate future. Mr H. Napier, secretary to the board, stated to-day that though there was some measure of discussion at the Auckland Conference which has just concluded, and there will be more at the conference of fruitgrowers which will meet at Wellington at the end of the month, nothing of moment will be made public. The board indeed can hardly act until the return of Colonel C. Gray, who has been sent to England by the Government to study marketing conditions generally and he will not be back in the Dominion until August or September. “It is more than probable that the levy on export will be reduced next year,” says Mr Napier. “The amount arranged for this season was 2d per case and there is sure to be a surplus. Consequently the amount can be offset against next year’s operations. No further great increase in the Dominion totals of fruit exported is anticipated. There may 15e increases in various districts. Auckland growers confidently expect their figures to rise a great deal, but the past season has shown a leap forward of 200 per cent, in the number of cases exported and that can scarcely occur again.” A GROWER’S VIEWS SCHEMES OF EMBARGO. AMERICAN COMPETITION. (Per United Press Association.) Dunedin, June 13. “The fruit growing industry is without doubt vitally interested in the report of the Imperial Economic Committee and it comes at an opportune time in view of the fact that the apple crops throughout the Dominion this year are such as to bring the industry nearer to a sound payable footing than ever before. Nevertheless, the result is likely to be unsatisfactory to the growers as the prices obtained in the overseas markets this season by New Zealand grown apples have been below the cost of production.” So says Mr. H. Turner, secretary of the Otago Fruit Growers’ Council, and an orchardist who has a very large output of apples every year and who knows the export business thoroughly. Mr. Turner said that it was not correct, as stated by the Economic Committee, that the fresh fruits from the southern dominions, of which apples were the most important, came into the United Kingdom at a time when it was relatively bare of other supplies. “Why is it not correct?” asked an Otago Daily Times reporter. “Because,” replied Mr. Turner, “the American merchants have stated quite openly that with their cool storage facilities they were in a position to supply the English markets all the year round with apples. We New Zealand fruit growers are not very pleased with our American cousins, as in addition to the costing of the British market with what they term their “overspilled apples” they gave the whole trade a severe shock last year when several serious cases of arsenic poisoning were traced to a shipment of American Jonathans. In America the codlin moth was much more prevalent than in New Zealand, and the trees there required much more severe treatment than those in the Dominion. In America moreover the arsaDate was applied in powder form, but this was not necessary in New Zealand whereas the British Board of Health had laid it down that apples containing more than 100th part of a grain of arsenic per lb. of apples was dangerous to the public health. Exhaustive tests at Home had shown that the percentage of arsenic in New Zealand grown "Was only 1.2000 th part of a grain per lb. of fruit, an amount hardly detectable. Still New Zealand apples had also suffered as a result of the poisoning by the American apples.” Mr. Turner said that the suggestions of the committee regarding a remedy for the present position that the foreign countries which principally supplied the United Kingdom with fruit, bought from the United Kingdom 7/- to 17/- per head of population whereas the Empire countries which sent fruit bought from £3 to £l7 per head proved most interesting. The committee reported that it could not recommend the schemes of embargo and license owing to the limitations imposed by the most favoured action clauses in various treaties. It also said that the policy of customs preferences will not come within its purview. The only poor solution the committee could offer was really voluntarily preference on the part of the consumer. The committee had evidently no knowledge of human nature. The housewife, regrettable though it might be to have to admit it, generally

bought in the cheapest market. She did not care whether the apples came from Tarras or Timbucktoo. It was all things being nearly equal and the price that mattered. "It was no use” said Mr Turner, "using the parrot cry to the fruit growers that they should buy British goods and support trade within the Empire, when such a ruinous comparison of figures as those named above was allowed to continue. From the fruit growers’ point of view the only way in which preference for any fruit could be established would be by the elimination of American apples during the four months of the year when the markets in Great Britain were being supplied to their fullest capacity with fruit from the British Dominions. This request had been placed before the British Government but so far without result.” "One would naturally think,” said Mr Turner, "that failing the embargo which, it would be noticed was not favoured by the Economic Committee, the same restrictions could be imposed on foreign importations by customs only, but evidently there was a reluctance to tread on “Uncle Sam’s” toes. They knew that at least New Zealand, Australia and South Africa of the dominions, took drastic steps to prevent the "dumping” of goods. What was the importation of the American spill over of apples but dumping? That being so there should,” concluded Mr Turner "at least be a dumping duty.”