CONTROL SYSTEM

Southland Times, Issue 22067, 14 July 1933, Page 7

CONTROL SYSTEM

BRITAIN’S IMPORTS FURTHER LIMITATION LIKELY STRONG QUOTA MOVEMENT (Special to United Press Association. New Zealand.) (Rec. 5.5 p.m.) London, July 12. General approval was accorded by most sections of the Press to Major Elliot’s speech in the House of Commons. This is a clear indication of the strength of the movement behind the quota proposals in cases where it can be shown, as the Minister sought yesterday to do, that the application of the principle is necessary to raise the prices of British produce. It is also increasingly obvious that very powerful political influence is at work to bring about a limitation of imports as the best way to help the home farmers. Major Elliot is at present concentrating on dairy produce in regard to which he declared that stable conditions in British dairying can be reached only if overseas supplies are regulated. He also stated that there must be further limitation of the imports of beef. The Irish Free State is apparently apprehensive, as a Bill was recently introduced into the Dail Eircann at short notice designed to meet the quota system in Britain. The Bill gives power to the Free State Minister of Agriculture to regulate the export of agricultural products falling under import quotas in any country so as to secure for Free State exporters the maximum benefits permitted by such a system of control. The latest development in the control system applies to fish, a provisional agreement having been reached between Britain and Germany for the regulation of fish supplies by German fishermen to the British market. DOMINION DELEGATES MEETING WITH BRITISH. REGULATION OF MARKETS. (United Press Assn.—Telegraph Copyright.) London, July 12. The British delegates suddenly summoned the dominion delegates to a meeting in connection with the “regulation of production and marketing.” British agriculturists are so urgently demanding action through members of the House of Commons that the Government is endeavouring to extend the mutual restriction already applied to meat, desiring further temporary reductions in meat imports and dairy products, particularly butter. Australia and New Zealand might even have to consider reducing their preserved milk exports.

It is understood the Ministers are pressing the dominions, but cannot enforce any measures owing to the Ottawa agreement. Undoubtedly a further restriction would rouse Australian and New Zealand farmers besides leading to difficulties when the Ottawa agreement terminates. The negotiations are at present a secret, but it is hinted that all the Ottawa agreements may be subject to controversy. NO SPECIAL SIGNIFICANCE. (United Press Assn. —Telegraph Copyright.) (Rec. 1.10 a.m.) London, July 13. Official circles deny that the British Government suddenly summoned a meeting of the dominions’ representatives yesterday in order to suggest a temporary regulation of production and marketing with a renewed request for a reduction of exports of dairy produce and a further temporary reduction in meat. Yesterday’s meeting was a regular consultation between Britain and the dominions, and the Australian Press Association is informed that it is unnecessary to attach special significance to it. PRIMARY PRODUCTS CONTINUANCE OF LOW PRICES. BRITAIN’S DESPERATE STRUGGLES. (British Official Wireless). Rugby, July 12. The House of Commons approved of the review of the Government’s agricultural policy as presented by Major Elliot. The Minister took a grave view of the consequences of a continuance of low prices for primary products. While the Government’s proposals had eased the situation in some respects, they were still engaged in a desperate struggle. He examined the work ot the wheat quota and the probable effects of brewers undertaking to increase the use of home-grown barley, and announced that there was every reason to believe that a satisfactory arrangement concerning the importation of Canadian oats would be reached. The marketing scheme for sugar beet, to take effect when the subsidy ended next year, was under preparation, and international co-ordination in sugar marketing was being discussed by the London Conference. The Government was prepared to limit but not reduce sugar growing in the United Kingdom. Major Elliot, after referring to the arrangements for the marketing of potatoes, fruit, and hops, said that the beef producers were engaged in a desperate struggle against ruinously low prices. Although importations had been reduced and fat cattle prices had advanced by 8 per cent, since the autumn, the position was still far from satisfactory, and further limitations would have to be imposed. The price of sheep, on the other hand, had increased by 34 per cent, in the same period. Imported pig meat to the extent of 49,000 tons had been taken off the market without disturbance of the retail market. BRITISH FARMERS QUOTA WOULD BE OF SMALL BENEFIT. (Per United Press Association.) Auckland, July 13. Referring to the cablegram from London regarding the proposed restriction of dairying imports, Mr W. Goodfellow, managing director of Amalgamated Dairies, said that the Minister of Agriculture in Britain, Major Elliot, was a keen advocate of restriction as a means of helping the British farmer. Meat and bacon restrictions had undoubtedly proved beneficial, mainly due to the fact that Britain produced 50 per cent, of the beef for her own requirements and a very large quantity of other meats.' The butter quota would not have the same result, as the main business of dairy farmers of the United Kingdom was the supply of fresh milk to 46,000,-

000 inhabitants of Britain. Butter manufacture was indeed a small industry in Great Britain and the rise in butter prices caused by restricting imports would be of very small benefit indeed to suppliers of fresh milk whose surplus milk was used for butter manufacture. That quota restricting exports from a country like New Zealand would be a national calamity went without saying, and the repercussion of such an act would be so serious as to warrant a prediction of financial disaster. Mr Goodfellow said he could say definitely from his own personal knowledge that the farmers of the United Kingdom had a real grievance against both Australia and New Zealand. They regarded the 25 per cent, exchange simply as a dumping measure which placed the United Kingdom farmers at a disadvantage in the matter of competition for the Home market. Further, the British manufacturer had complained bitterly against the Australian and New Zealand policy of fostering local industries and thereby virtually excluding British imports. A New Zealand business man who had recently visited the Midlands had informed him that he found it unpleasant to admit that he came from New Zealand or. account of the unpopularity of the Dominion’s existing policy of restricting imports. “The Government should at once cable Mr Forbes,” said Mr Goodfellow, “and ascertain exactly upon what terms New Zealand could retain a free market for its produce in the United Kingdom, and this should be secured at once, no matter what the cost.” STRONG OPPOSITION THE FARMERS’ UNION. (Per United Press Association.) • Wellington, July 13. The quota cablegram received by the Press was read to-day at the Farmers’ Union Conference which passed a resolution: “That the conference vigorously oppose any governmental step in the direction of curtailing or restricting the export of primary produce by way of quota or _ otherwise, considering any action in this direction inimical to the best interests of the Dominion; that the free and unrestricted entry of our products into the British market is so vital to the prosperity of the Dominion that negotiations should be entered into with the British Government to ascertain on what terms this privilege could be secured and what concession _ should be made with a view to obtaining it; and suggests that in order to obviate any i suggestion of quotas on our primary products we should endeavour by every means to develop free trade with the | Homeland.” ( I A committee was appointed to cable Mr Forbes setting out the farmers viewpoint, |