A U.S. view of N.Z.’s trade

Press, 20 April 1979, Page 14

A U.S. view of N.Z.’s trade

A cheerful picture of trade between the United States and New Zealand has been painted by the retiring American Ambassador, Mr Armistead I. Selden, jun. The United States is already a substantial trading partner: it took $439 million worth of New Zealand’s exports in the trade year which ended last June; this made the United States New Zealand’s second largest customer. New Zealand took $420 million worth of American goods, and the United States was this country’s third largest supplier. Mr Selden did more than point to the present trade; he spoke of future trade, and his confidence cannot fail to be cheering. If his view of the future is persuasive when he returns to Washington, New Zealand’s place in trade with his own country will be much brighter.

Mr Selden tried to allay fears felt by New Zealand, about the countercyclical beef legislation proposed in the United States. He has said that this legislation will maintain present access for New Zealand beef. His point is accurate but does not contain quite as much hope as he would seem to suggest. Secure access is good in itself, but New Zealand is also interested in the steadiness of supply or predictable demand, at worst; better still, it needs a growth in trade. In the short term there is bound to be growth, because the present world supplies of beef and the state of beef herds leave room for more New Zealand exports. However, no continuing growth seems to be envisaged. That is less reassuring. New Zealand appears to have retained a substantial quota for cheese exports to the United States. This year it is allowed to send 17.500 tonnes of cheese. Because New Zealand regained some of the cheese market it had lost in Britain, the strong possibility was

that it would lose some of the market in the United States. American support was given in regaining some of the British market. Logically, of course, the United States could not argue for better access in one part of the world and deny access to its own market. The quota obtained is on Cheddar types of cheese. New Zealand could sell more expensive cheeses without restriction.

The United States gives free access to lamb, so the question is about how much New Zealand can do with the American market. The Meat Export Development Company (N.Z.), Ltd, which handles sales of lamb to the United States, works under some difficulty because it has to take second place to the sale of lamb to the United Kingdom. The company cannot take all selected cuts of lamb that it would like to put on the American shelves. Nevertheless, it has worked well within the limits of these rules.

Although the production of lamb in the United States has been falling steadily, a taste for lamb has been established. New Zealand should be able to do something worth while in such circumstances. The cloud on an otherwise bright horizon is a protest from American sheepfarmers: they have voiced some fears about the imports of New Zealand lamb.

With some success, New Zealand manufacturers have turned their attention to the west coast of the United States. There they face tariffs, but not quotas. They also have the problems of dealing with a highly specialised market and their goods have to conform to various specifications and competition is stiff. These are among the hazards of having to earn a crust by exporting. If the work is done, the rewards are there.