RUSSIAN BUTTER.

Waikato Times, Volume 110, Issue 18378, 11 July 1931, Page 9

RUSSIAN BUTTER.

"RUTHLESS WARFARE.” EFFECT ON EMPIRE. M'R A. M. SAMUEL’S CONTENTIONS. Reference to Russian butter and a statement of what lie thought its probable effect on the Empire product would be, was made by Mr A. M. Samuel, M.P., in the course of an address to the New Zealand Farmers’ Union Conference. Mr Samuel recently returned from a trip abroad. "There seems lo be a conflict of opinion regarding t|io influence of Russian butter on our British markets," ho said. "This is because of the fact that In the immediate past the amount of Russian produce, compared with ihe actual consumption of Britain, has not been great. Some are inclined to ignore the economic danger of her present campaign. "Allhough butter of good quality is being sent from Russia lo England at dumping prices, it is Ihe effect on Ihe markets of the near future of which wo must he apprehensive. Wo must he alive to ihe fact that the present sales arc for I he purpose of establishing credits for Russia, enabling her to purchase the most up-to-date machinery for equipping t'aclories to pursue an intensive policy of manufacturing primary products on the latest scientific basis, owing to her vast resources of raw material and conscription of labour, together with

i her determination to become a dominant factor in world production, she Is bound to become a serious menace to the primary producers of the British Empire. Her Insistence in selling her produce below the rulins price for that of the Empire product makes it clear that the return which the New Zealand farmer is to receive in the future will be based upon that set by Russia. Tills ruthless economic warfare on Hie part of the Soviet can only, in my opinion, be efflectively met by some form of tariff giving preference to Empire products. A Grave Warning. "To show how seriously the position is viewed in ■ England, let mo placo on record the remarks of Mr 11. E. Davies, the representative of the New Zealand Dairy Produce Board in London. Mr Davies issues a grave warning about the effect on British and Empire markets of the introduction of lUisisan butter into Great Britain. Speaking at Bonar Law College. Aslibridgc, on May 24 last, he said: ‘lnformation just received from Russia showed that throughout Hie Ukraine dairy factories were being built along the most modern lines in j preparation for enormous exports of j butler. The entry of Russian butler lies not in quantities now landing in j London, but in Hie Rusisan poLentia 1 i : ties, with labour conditions which would not be tolerated In Hie British Empire. In order to swamp ihe Empire within the next, five years, motor trucks and railway refrigerator cars were being construried to cnsuie swift transmission from dairy centres to ports. Peasants under siriet discipline were being sent in groups io i farms under the collective farm plan, 1 and stud animals were being drawu

from all European countries In preparation for a big Increase in production. This had a real significance.’ Mr Davies Unafraid. “If the menace were not a real one,” said Mr Samuel, “would our representative in London be so perturbed? I am glad to see that Mr Davies 'has the welfare of the Dominion so much at heart ttiat lie is unafraid to issue this grave warning. TW’O days before I left England ihe unloading of 15,000 barrels of butter in the Port of London, part of a consignment of £2,000,000 worth, was viewed with the greatest alarm, especially in view of Die fact that England had recently been flooded with other products of Russia at dumped prices, and produced under conditions which would not be tolerated in a British country. These products included wheat, timber, matches, sweets, and even Easter eggs, at prices which were driving the British workmen out of employment. Fancy atheist Russia supplying England with Easier eggs! The shipment of butter evoked a storm of protest from newspapers, and from people all over Britain. The greatest anger was i expressed at ,the fact that tills butter | was to be blended with the British I or Empire, and resold. Due such j letter of protest to the Daily Mall of : May HI states: ‘We sing “Britons never shall be slaves,” but so long as we continue to purchase from such a depraved nation as Russia in prefe"cnee to our own or Empire products, we are slaves buying slave-made goods to the detriment of producers of all classes at Home, as well as j throughout Ihe Empire. Farmers are i asking how they can pay their way in 1 face of such unfair competition,’ ”1 would like to emphasise tha

point that the matters I have pointed out to-day are so important that In my opinion the representatives of the primary producers should Immediately get busy and appoint a committee to go thoroughly into the questions of the quality of some of our primary products, the betterment of selling organisations, and the urgent necessity of extending our overseas markets. The economlo battle Is being so fiercely waged and competition Is so keen In quality and price that consumers can afTord to be intonslvely critical. Therefore it behoves us co see that our New Zealand producis attain and maintain the highest standard of perfection." INVASION IN ENGLAND. FARMERS’ OPINIONS. There was an International flavour about a remit discussed by the conference of the New Zealand Farmers’ Union. It was as follows: — “That In view of the serious invasion of our Home market by produce from Russia, where we have reason to believe the conditions are akin to slavery, the Government be urged to keep a close watch on the position and prevent a similar position arising in New Zealand." Mr A. E. Robinson (Auckland) asked the conference to consider the remit carefully before voting. Mr G. Hodgson (Auckland) said that slavery was mentioned in the remit. What were conditions in New Zealand, where a man had to drag his wife and children through the

mire In the dark hours of the morning or night? Children had gone to sleep In school as a result of having to get up early to milk cows. If one talked about slavery In Russia he was opposed to It. Mr R. H. Fetsst (Auckland) asked whether it was suggested that it was unfair trading for Russia to send her produce away. Was It dumping? There was no such thing as dumping primary products, which were regulated by world parity. Mr W. Boyd (Auckland) said tha conference might get Itself into trouble over the remit. Mr W. R. Hammond (Canterbury) said that Russia had rid herself of her national debt; we were still working under It. Mr F. C. Roberts: “What would you say If the Farmers’ Union In England did the same thing as we are suggesting to Russia?” Mr J. A. Kerr (Ilawko’s Bay): “This is no business of ours; what right have we to criticise the Homo Government as to what goes on there?" The remit was carried in the following form: — “That is view of the serious invasion of our Home market by produeo from Russia, the Government be urged lo keep a close watch on the position.”