FRUIT CONTROL.

Press, Volume LX, Issue 18217, 30 October 1924, Page 12

FRUIT CONTROL.

COMMITTEE'S REPORT

TABLED. BILL RECOMMENDED WITH AMENDMENTS. (rr.KSS ASSOCIATION- TKLEGBAIf.) WELLINGTON, October 29. Tn the House of Representatives this afternoon, the Local Bills f'ommittee reported on the Fruit <'.:itrol Bill, recommending that it he allowed to proceed with amendments.

Mr T. K. Sidcy opposed a proposal 1o submit the question whether the fruit crop should be exported or reserved for local consumption to the Dominion with a referendum. This, he understood, was one of the Committee's recommendations. lie objected to fruitgrowers in Otago. for instance, being placed in the hands of those of Nelson, as would be the case if such a referendum were taken, because Nelson would favour export, while Otago preferred to organise the local market. Mr G. Witty thought the Bill would have little chance of passing. It was the? first measure of control applied to perishable foodstuffs and would not operate in the growers' interests, and it certainly would result in the consumer having to pay more for his fruit. Jf a. Government guarantee was desired, it should be made a matter of provincial application. The whole country should not be penalised for the benefit of one particular district. The Hon. D. Buddo thought the Bill was nothing more than an unnecessary piece of grandmotherly legislation, ne suggested that the Bill be made to apply ouly to the province of Nelson. The Hon. W. Nosworthy (Minister of Agriculture) pointed out that evcry province already had a chance under the Bill whether it desired the measure or not. If any province did not want tbe Bill ifc would not be forced upon that district. The Bill as drafted was needed, but if any of the suggestions made by its. critics were adopted the measure would become useless and would be b.etter scrapped. There was in existence already a private scheme of control of fruit for the market and for export under pooling conditions more drastic than anything proposed in the Bill. Fruit exported under controlwould go on to the London market, not simply as New Zealand fruit, but as Otago or Nelson fruit. Nelson Growers' Plight. Mr E. P. Hudson said many Nelson fruitgrowers were in a desperate case, and the Bill provided means to enable them to hold on to their farms. If the Bill was thrown out, numbers of fruit* farmers must walk off their lands. Mr W. A. Veitch thought the Bill should be allowed to proceed, but the interests of producers must be conserved. There should be some limit to oontrol, however. Meat and dairy produce already were controlled, there was talk of making similar provision for kauri gum, and soon there would be nothing left uncontrolled except cauliflowers. Then ».hey might expect to see a deputation from the Chinese gardeners Jit Otaki asking for control.

Mr Holland said effective marketing was the urgent question of the hour.. The average grower in Nelson, he found, i received about a farthing per pound, but in Wellington, just across the water, the same fruit cost tho consumer sixpence to eightpence a pound. The growers-would be glad to get a penny aT pound all the year round. Legislation should ensure a fair return to the grower and allow the consumer to get supplies at a more reasonable price. Mr H. Atmorc hoped the Bill would be permitted to proceed. All districts were interested in this matter. Fruitgrowers must combine and organise their methods of shipping and marketing. ..Growers could not individually approach the highly organised shipping concerns with any hope of obtaining J favourable transport charges. . j

Mr G. McKay saw no great objection to the Bill. Ho understood that a considerable quantity of fruit would be exported from HawkVs Bay this season, and then would be* full opportunity for the province to decide for itself on the matter of control.

The Hon. C. J. Parr said trie Auckland growers almost unanimously favoured the general principles of the Bill.

Mr J... Jff. Dickson said Otago people were opposed to the Bill unless it permitted local option in both loeaianar&eting and the export of fruit. The report was tabled. '" (SMBCUIi TO "THE PBZSa.^ "WELLINGTON, October 29. The TivSt Control Bill was reported to the House to-day with amendments made by the Agricultural Committee. The control of exports will not be' operative nntil brought into force by proclamation, and a proclamation shall not be issued until a majority of the producers hare voted in favour of it. No one will be able to vote unless he has an orchard from which 25 cases of fruit were exported in any one of the three years preceding 1924. A majority will decide the issue.

There is a new provision that the Board shall not, save with the consent of the owners, pool for sale any fruit produced in one provincial district with fruit produced in any other provincial district.

Of the members appointed as successors to the first members of the Board, one shall be appointed for one year, one for two years, and one for three years. The number of years for which these members are appointed shall be determined by lot.