GOVERNMENT IN BUSINESS

Waikato Times, Volume 104, Issue 17501, 7 September 1928, Page 9

GOVERNMENT IN BUSINESS

BY PROXY. s B I v TIIE FRUIT INDUSTRY. f (Nineteen Twenty-Eight Committee.) | Though the incubus of “Absolute i. Control” has been removed from the ’ dairy industry, the fruit and honey in- ", duslrics still are labouring under its ' malign influences and so losing opportunities for substantial expansion. These industries, of course, are not of the same concern to the Dominion as the dairy industry is, and consequently do not attract the same attention from the general public; but still are of very considerable national importance and their development along sound economic lines should be encouraged in every way possible. That this has not been the case with the fruit industry, at any rate, during the recent past is demonstrated by the fact that the growers have acquired the habit of appealing to the Government each year for a guarantee against loss upon Uie shipments they send abroad under the care and direction of the Control Board- The . Government has been generous in this respect—unduly generous some of its critics think—but the fruit industry seems to be no more firmly established by its expenditure than it was before this further impost was thrust upon the taxpayers. Competition Stifled. At the beginning of the present year, before the season's crops were available for market, a mercantile firm that for many years had been closely .associated with the fruit industry communicated with the Department of Agriculture, suggesting that it should be allowed to send fruit overseas on account of itself and some of its customers to whom it had given assistance and to whom it was ready lo give more. This firm had rendered invaluable service to the promoters of tlm first overseas shipment of apples in 19i:0, and before and after that event had" closely identilied itself with the orchardisls and their business. Notwithstanding the fact that the institution of “Absolute Control” has deprived this firm of its export apple trade and of such securities as it may have held, it continues to linance many of the growers and lo furnish Ihem with supplies and information. Probably there are many cases, however, in which if could not take this risk since the Finance Act of last year provides, | in effect, that the claims of the Control Board take priority to all other claims of whatever nature. Law-made Monopoly. The legislation responsible for this state of affairs is embodied in the Fruit Control Act, 1924, and the Finance Act (No. 2), 1 927, from which essential clauses may be quoted. “For the purpose of securing any advances that may be made to the hoard or lo the ! owners of any fruit at tne request of the hoard,” a clause iu the Fruit Control Act provides, "the hoard shall, by virtue of this Act and without further authority have full power on behalf of the owners of any fruit lo give security over such fruit and to execute all I morlagages and otner instruments of I assurance in the same manner in all j respects as if the board were the legal i owners of such fruit.” “Where any money is payable by the New Zealand Fruit Export Conti-- 1 Board pursuant to the Fruit Contro’ Act 1924, to an owner of fruit in respect of fruit disposed of or to be disposed of by the board on account of that owner,” a clause in the Finance Act, to make assurance doubly sure, runs, “the board may pay Hie amount to the New Zealand Fruitgrowers’ Federation, Ltd., as agent for the owner, and the receipt of the federation shall be a suflicient discharge for trie amount so paid by the board." Squelching Competition. The effect of tills legislation is tn place the producers entirely in the ; hands of the board and of its business 1 partner, the New Zealand Fruitgrowers’ 1 Federation, Ltd-, without any means < of redress even if these bodies, or ] either of them, arc guilty of flagrant 1 neglect or gross mat-administration. A high legal authority has given it as 1 his opinion that the hoard lias statu- I torv power to mortgage the fruit ‘of 1 the owners, with or without their eon- 1 sent., and, in combination with the New 1 Zealand Fruitgrowers’ Federation Ltd., 1 to deduct moneys due for goods sup- 1 plied to owners jn priority to moneys ‘ owing under registered lien. This 1 means that many of the growers are entirely at the mercy of the board and its. commercial ally, and that while £ they are dependent upon these bodies for their finance and their supplies, 1 they have not the advantage of the ) free competition which, proverbially, is S the soul of progressive business ;'' Surely what, has proved to he good . for the dairy industry would prove I equally good for the fruit industry, and , U so give it an impetus that speedily i j would relieve it from dependence upon , spoon-feeding by the State. ‘ f