A COMPROMISE?

Waikato Times, Volume 122, Issue 20464, 2 April 1938, Page 7

A COMPROMISE?

EMPIRF PRODUCERS THE REGULATION OF EXPORTS PROPOSALS FOR CONTROL United Press Assn.— Elec. Tel. Copyrtynt SYDNEY, April 1 The trend of discussion at the British Empire producers’ conference today again indicated the possibility of the Rritish delegation's proposals for producer control in tlie regulation of exports reaching the United Kingdom market forming the basis of a compromise. Mr Cleveland Fyfe, one of the British delegates emphasised that with the rejection of the British proposals there would be no alternative constructive proposal, and that under the British plan there was no intention of imposing levies. Mr T. C. Brash (New Zealand) said he refused to believe the British Government and the British people were asking them to accept a position under which they were to be led to restrictions or the imposition of levies. Mr A. J. Murdoch, chairman of the New Zealand Dairy' Board, and Mr 11. Mellsop, president of the Auckland Farmers’ Unionr were among the speakers. Fight by New Zealand Farmers Mr Mellsop said the New Zealand Farmers’ Union for 33 years had fought for the freest trade with the United Kingdom. If restrictions were imposed he said, then it must be done by the British Government. He added that the British delegation's proposals in their present form could not be accepted by the New Zealand representatives. The conference was adjourned. Mr W. W. Mulholland, president of the New Zealand Farmers’ Union, interviewed to-night by the United Press Association, said Sir Reginald DormanSmlth’s proposals that the Dominions should endeavour to expand their foreign markets, and that machinery should he set up to regulate supplies to Ihe United Kingdom, seemed to most of the Dominion delegates to embody or envisage greater restriction's on Dominion produce. The British delegates claimed that their object was to get the Empire producers to come together to form an organisation ->r organisations which would regulate or control the marketing of their produce. The delegates did not doubt the honesty of purpose of their British colleagues, but the resolution sponsored by Sir Reginald was clearly open to the interpretation that the producers themselves had invited or had approved of quantitative restriction. Hope to Reconoile Views Mr Mulholland added that while the resolution or the suggested amendments had not been put to the conference, neither had they been withdrawn. The debate had ended with an agreement that the leaders of the various delegations would come together in committee to see whether it were possible to reconcile all the views and then evolve a satisfactory or positive action. Mr Mulhollond said there was no need for any producer to be unduly alarmed as the result of what was. happening at the conference. The delegates had agreed that restrictions were out of the question, and so far as New Zealand was concerned the producers would not allow themselves to be fettered. THE FARMERS’ DIFFICULTY EASILY-GLUTTED MARKETS SYSTEM OF / F.MPIRE COUNCILS (Official Wireless) RUGBY, March 31 Commenting on the Empire food producers’ conference in Sydney, the Times, in a leading article, points out that the farmers’ difficulty has been that while he can raise foodstuffs abundantly, the only way of disposing of them has been to throw' them on easily-glutted markets, since those who use them most cannot afford them except at prices unremunerative to the producer. " Further restriction of production affords only a temporary' solution.” says the Times. “ Great interest is accordingly' being taken by the conference in the suggestion made on behalf of the United Kingdom delegation for inaugurating a system of Empire commodity councils on the lines of the Empire Beef Council to collaborate with producers’ representatives from the principal supplying countries. One advantage of such councils is that they would enable producers to familiarise themselves with conditions both in importing and completing exporting countries. Their success would finally depend on the extent to which they were aide to create stable markets rather by facilitating consumption than by restricting the supply.”