INCREASED OUTPUT

Wanganui Chronicle, Volume 89, Issue 99, 28 April 1945, Page 3

INCREASED OUTPUT

EXPORT MEAT POSITION ! MR. HAMMOND’S review I , A review of the export meat posi- • tion and the four-year agreement with ■ the United Kingdom Government was given by* Mr. J. R. L. Hammond 1 (.Rata), a member of the New Zealand ; Meat Producers’ Board, when address- ; ing a meeting convened by the Wan--1 ganui Provincial Executive of the Farmers’ Union yesterday. Mr. Hammond dealt also with the Meat Pool account and the Meat Industry Stabilisation Account. He stressed the need for New Zealand maintaining its reputation for high quality on ’the London market and said that an improvement in the shipping position had resulted in much meat being lifted from stores in the Dominion. Mr. Hammond said at the outset that he welcomed criticism, provided it was brought under his notice and was constructive. There had been a controversy in the Wanganui district regarding the price paid for carcases of mutton exceeding 641 b. in weight, but a full statement with details of schedule prices, had been published in the Press. “There is no need to go into all those details now, so I shall give a general resume of the meat position up to date,” Mr. Hammond said. “KEYNOTE OF POLICY” Production was the keynote of the Meat Board’s policy. Fortunately, the weather had helped farmers to oarry out this policy and make more meat available to Britain. On the other hand it was unfortunate that this position had been reversed in Australia because of ' severe droughts. In New Zealand, however, the average increases had been lilb on lambs, 421 b on wethers, and 41b on ewes. As a result an additional 13,000 tons of meat had been made available for export, a notable effort on the. part of New Zealand farmers. “Fat is urgently needed in Britain, as well as meat, so long as you don’t get too much fat in the one place,” said Mr. Hammond. “The amount of fat going into England on our meat /has not been the subject of complaint to the board.” The shipping, position had improved and meat was being lifted quickly, with the result that stores , in New Zealand would be practically empty at the start of next season, provided the present rate of lifting was maintained. At present New Zealand was operating under a four-year agreement with the United Kingdom Government. Next season’s prices would be at the present rate, but‘in the following year, when the agreement expired, ; they would be reviewed. “This does not mean that there will be an upward or downward tendency, but prices will be reviewed and in the meantime Britain has agreed to take all our meat,” said Mr. Hammond. TWO MEAT ACCOUNTS. After explaining the difference between the Meat Pool Account and the Meat Industry Stabilisation Account, Mr. Hammona said the iormer was established primarily for the purpose of maintaining the value of ewe mutton. Returns from tallow and pelts were still being paid into it and at October last the account had a credit of f3,500,000. This fund was increasing at the rate of £1,500,000 a year and would continue to increase. At the end of the four-year contract with the United Kingdom the account would probably have a credit of between t 9,000,000 and £lO 000,000. Credits in the Meat Industry Stabilisation Account were the proceeds of increases of the sale prices of meats and edible offals 'received after the stabilisation, dtite, 15, 1942.The stabilisation policy in New Zealand had’ been rigidly enforced so far as the farmers were concerned, but this did not apply to other sections of the community. “This makes it very difficult for us, but justice is on outside,” said Mr. Hammond. “I think the Government of the day knows that it is not playing the game with us and that it is giving the advantage to other sections.” Referring to lump sum payments from the United Kingdom Government to New Zealand, Mr. Hammond said that it. seemed at first that these payments could only have been made as an extra price for produce. The Meat Board and the Dairy Board, however, had set up a joint committee io make a thorough investigation into the position, inquire into the origin of the payments, and examine documentary evidence in the possession of the Government. The joint committee had reported that these payments, amounting to £12,000,000 in a lump sum. and £4,000,000 for each year of the agreement, were made to offset stabilisation in New Zealand, not for payment of produce. The New Zealand Government was entitled to credit for having arranged this but at the conference of producers in Wellington the position should have been clearnly stated. Mr. W. S. Glenn (Kakatahi) said he interpreted this as meaning that the British Government appreciated the policy of stabilisation and the part played by New Zealand producers. NEW ZEALAND'S ATTITUDE. Mr. Hammond said that when the original discussions took place with Great Britain, New Zealand made it clear that it did not intend extracting high prices because of wartime demands. “We agreed to accept the 1939 price level,” he said. “You can see ihe advantage that meant to Great Britain. Mr. Glenn: And that lump sum payment was New Zealand's reward. It was not the Meat Board’s policy to subsidise other sections of the community at the expense of producers, but when the increased export prices were made available the Prime Minister (Mr. Fraser) had refused to allow an increase in the price paid for meat by consumers on the domestic market in New Zealand. As a result the domestic consumer was subsidised bv the Meat Industry Stabilisation Account. but the limit imposed was £400,000 a year. Had it not been for this the price of meat on the domestic market would have risen to the export level. The Government, on the other hand, had not adhered rigidly to its policy of stabilisation, and had pushed up wages here and there. “It is not fair when farmers are required to subsidise one section of the community that there should be a general rise in wages,” said Mr, Hammond.