The Timaru Herald MONDAY, APRIL 13, 1931. “YOUR COUNTRY FIRST.”

Timaru Herald, Volume CXXXIV, Issue 18850, 13 April 1931, Page 8

The Timaru Herald MONDAY, APRIL 13, 1931. “YOUR COUNTRY FIRST.”

J In parts of Canterbury this week an organised campaign will be | attempted, as the president of (lie | Canterbury Manufacturers’ Association declares in an Industries i Week message, “primarily as an educative campaign to make the people realise the merits of New Zealand-made goods and encourage them to purchase those goods in preference to importations.” It can be said, in support of such a movement, that more than one statesman, and more than one Governor-General has attempted to impress upon the people the personal prudence, the patriotism and the national value of buying the manufactured goods of their own country. A former Governor-General (Sir Charles Fergusson), a few days before leaving these favoured shores, on his return to the Old Land, issued tliis appeal: “X would make a strong plea to the people of New Zealand to buy Dominion-made goods. They w'ould be astounded at the difference it would make to the well-being of the country, and how far it would go towards the difficulty of solving unemploment. I believe that very shortly there is going to be launched a great appeal to the people of New Zealand to support their own industries and to buy New Zealand-made goods. X would only like to say that if we supported these industries as they should be supported, what a difference It would made in the life of the country, how I much employment it would give, and | how far it would go toward solving that difficult problem. May I make an appeal to you to give preference always to New Zealand goods? Failing New Zealand goods, buy British goods; and failing British goods, Empire goods. And X do believe, from what I have seen of the industries of this country, that if only you would patronise and ask for New Zealand goods, you would be astonished at the range and quality of what is being manufactured in this country, of which a great many people at present know very little.” Inspired by the appeals of distinguished statesmen and leading citizens, representatlvs of New I Zealand's secondary industries have repeatedly pointed with j pride, not only to past achievements and substantial progress made in New Zealand, but to the vast potentialities of New Zealand's industrial activities, if the people themselves do their part. Moreover, within recent years, notwithstanding economic disi abilities and the astounding and disturbing unconcern shown by average citizens for the welfare of the Dominion's industries, statistical proof is forthcoming to emphasise the increasing yield of the country's secondary

•Including working proprietors, flncluding amounts drawn by working proprietors in lieu of salaries or wages. It is nevertheless clear that if new resolutions are borne out of existing economic difficulties, and more money can be kept in the Dominion, the unemployment menace would utimately disappear, and a new era of more durable prosperity would dawn. Some idea of the recuperative influence of united action can be gained from an appreciation of the importance of even a small increase in the purchase of New Zealand-made goods. For example, if every New Zealander would devote another five shillings per week to the support of the country’s secondary industries, the additional patronage would show an aggregate for the year of twenty millions, which is a sum actually iu excess of the total wages and salaries paid to the 85,797 New Zealanders at present engaged in the secondary industries of the Doin’nion. Is it not possible to offer such a simple yet effective contribution to the efforts being made to solve unemployment? The late Sir Joseph Ward, in one of his last messages, expressed himself as “whole-heartedly in agreement with the view that a strong appeal to the public to buy goods of New Zealand manufacture should react favourably on the unemployment problem, especially under existing economic conditions.” It is futile, of course, to indulge in sweeping generalisations. What is required is deiinite action. In this connection, the president of the Canterbury Manufacturers’ Association has expressed the firm conviction that “the same amount of money which is being spent on unemployment relief—and is getting us

nowhere —would be much better employed in producing primary and secondary industries for which the whole of the material is in Ibis country.” This point is so well made, as to appeal to the people of this district, where thousands of pounds are being expended and “getting us nowhere,” while one or two promising industrial .enterprises, notably the woollen mills, might bo revived if the Unemployment Board knew its job, and perman ent employment provided for hundreds of workers who could bo profitably employed producing New Zealand-made goods. If other courses of action suggest themselves to various districts, a big start could be made in the permanent solution of the biggest problem of the day.

IS THE CHEESE INDUSTRY IN DANGER?

Alhough the thoughtful man in the street has more than a vague idea of the immense importance of the Dominion’s pastoral industry, it is manifestly clear that something approaching a veritable eruption of outraged public opinion will bo necessary to arouse departmental officialdom in New Zealand to the grave dangers, largely of our own creation, that threaten the Dominion cheese industry. Some years ago, the yield from the oversea sale of cheese did not represent a very large proportion of the country's overseas trade, but although the development of this section of the country’s primary industry has been rapid and sustained, we doubt if the average citizen realises that the value of cheese exported by tliis country in five years has exceeded thirty million sterling. The steady increase in cheese production is well indicated in the following table::

Doubtless it will be suggested that the diminished returns for an increased exportable yield has been duo to weaker markets for all products, but the unpleasant fact remains that there are factors in operation in the Homeland which are detrimentally affecting the interests of New Zealand cheese producers. Some days ago our well-informed contributor “T.C.L.” who recently returned from a visit to the Homeland, presented an exhaustive examination of the existing conditions of the cheese industry, particularly iu relation to the place of New Zealand cheese in the British market. This aspect of the question is highly important in view of the statistical evidence that of New Zealand’s cheese export in 1930 of 1,812,093 j cwt., the market in the United j Kingdom absorbed all but about ten thousand cwt. Our contributor pointed out that strained relations between the New Zealand producer and selling organisations in the Homeland “are sufficient to disturb the most complacent individual who has any interest in the New Zealand cheese industry.” Put bluntly, it is stated that British buyers are alleging that the “export of standardised cheese as ‘cheddar’ is not playing the game.” “T.C.L.” goes so far as to say that it has been proved beyond doubt that the standardised cheese exported during last and the present season has gone nearer to damming the whole output of the Dominion, than it is pleasant to contemplate.” In view of the well-organised and efficientlyequipped activities of the Dominion’s rivals in the Home markets, and the threat of more intense competition, it is feared that the mischief the existing operations have caused has made it almost impossible for New Zealand cheese products to recover the proud position this country once held on the British market. This is a startling allegation, which warrants the immediate attention not only of departmental officialdom with its constitutional reluctance to move without delay, but surely suggests an immediate statement by the Government. Our contributor docs not mince his words, and he does not speak without the most exhaustive investigation. He declares that warnings have been belittled; friendly advice ignored; obvious lessons disregarded.

SAVING THE INDUSTRY. “Better returns, by way of increased production,' were sought and a 'sort of midsummer madness,’ ” “T.C.L.” points out, “seemed to lay bold of the dairy industry, within recent years. The way to more prosperity was to ignore the British merchant, and for New Zealand to do its marketing direct.” The sorry failure of that piece of foolishness is now a matter of history, but the fact remains that neither in the maintenance of quality nor in the study of tactics pursued has the New Zealand producer done very much more than undermine the good name of the country’s cheese-selling business. Putting the position in a nutshell “T.C.L.” says: It is not exaggeration to assert that the standardised cheese exported this season will have cost the Dominion at least a million pounds in the decreased

prices obtained. It has done more harm than that; it has roused the British merchant to seek other avenues of supply, an action which constitutes a graver menace to the New Zealand industry than seems to be recognised here. From every point of view the “standardised” experiment has been a ghastly failure.

What has been the result? It is stated that the standard of New Zealand cheese has so fallen in quality that our products are “now regarded not only with caution, but with actual suspicion.” We know wlint this means. Our contributor has placed the question so clearly before the people that the strongest agitation should be organised in support of a protest demanding that the Government investigate these arresting and disturbing allegations, which so closely affect the future of an industry, which brings us something between six and seven millions a year. It is already hinted that British traders are turning to other parts of Europe for supplies, and “New Zealand,” to quote “T.C.L.” “stands more than a chance of being pushed off the British market, or of holding only the position of a supplier of a lower grade article.” In any case, it is tolerably clear that deterioration of quality may place New Zealand cheese in hopeless rivalry with the high-class products of countries which have heeded the advice of British traders and are striving to supply an article that meets the known requirements of the British consumer. If, however, the New Zealand cheese industry is to escape disaster it is obvious that reform in methods and tactics must begin without delay, and as our contributor “T.C.L.” urges (and lie is entitled to high commendation for his courageous and well-grounded criticism), the aim of the New Zealand dairy farmer should be improvement in quality and the production of a high-grade article for which the British market asks.

| industries: Yeai ended March 31st. 1928. 1930. No. No. Estalishments .. 5,166 5,177 Persons engaged*— Males 66,000 68,442 Females .. .. 15,756 17,355 Total .. .. 81,756 85,797 £ £ Salaries and wages paldt— To males .. .. 15,300,988 15,870,516 To females .. 1,576,790 1,750,948 Total .. .. 16,877,778 17,621,464 H.P. H.P. Motive power .. 417,105 587,552 £ £ Cost of materials used 55,303,197 59,208,807 Value of products 87,732,003 93,464,526 Added value Value of— 32,423,806 34,255,719 Land & buildings 23,301,449 25,446,809 Plant & machinery 41,372,701 46,655,154 Total .. .. 64,674,150 71,655,154

Year. Output. Cwts. Value. £ 1924 1,595,486 7,023,297 1925 1,376,754 5,800,808 1926 1,461,548 5,939,359 1927 1,492,792 5.582,546 1928 1,567,272 6,693,959 1929 1,779,003 7,017,463 1930 1,812,981 6,438,438