MARKETING OUR PRODUCE

Dominion, Volume 13, Issue 236, 30 June 1920, Page 8

MARKETING OUR PRODUCE

WORK OF THE BRISTOL AND DOMINIONS PRODUCERS' ASSOCIATION THE " COUNTRY OF ORIGIN " PRINCIPLE (Published by Arrangement.)

Major A. E. M. Norton, D.5.0., man-, aging .director of the Bristol and Dominions Producers' Association, is at present visiting Wellington in connection with the rapidly-growing business of that association. The organisation only commenced business some six years ago, and since then it is apparent that its progress has been wonderful, although that period had been a very unsettled one owing to tho war. Tho avowed' object of the association was then, as it is now, to bring the producer in New Zealand in closer touch With consumer by eliminating what he called the unnecessary middleman. ' 'He said that when the scheme was forward it , was scouted and' criticised as fanciful and impossible; that 'the idea of having the produce distributed from such ports as Bristol, Liverpool, Glasgow, Newcastie-on-Tyne, a.yd Hull, to feed , the vast populations of which those places -were the natural outlet and inlet, instead of distributing it via Tooley Street (London) was not to be considered. Of course it was not— becauso it was up against the vested interests of Tooley Street, but the association had set out to show that it could meet those interests, and lie claimed thaft it had proved its case up to tha hilt. ■

"Take the map of England—is it not natural that the foodstuffs for tho whole of South Wales and the south-western corner of England should be supplied from Bristol? There is' no reason on earth why it stiould bo sent to London, and then forwarded on at great 'delay and expense, when the vessels could ba docked in the splendid. new and' up-to-' data.'docks of Bristol, which are within immediate touch with tho surrounding districts. So is it tho case with Liverpool, Glasgow, Newcastle, and Hull, in all.of which ports we have set up agencies. As proof of our progress nere is a photograph of our Bristol etaff of'six years ago, and here ia one of our staff to-dny." : In the one photograph there werp precisely nijie.people. in the other.between fifty and sixty—seated round tables at a dinner, given to Major Norton before ho left for New Zealand. He also showed phonographs of the oM offices, and tho extensive premises of the association today. which showed the same striking •growth. " Continuing, Major' Norton said that what interested parties had said six or seven years ago was "impossible" had been made possible, and would be the accepted .system of th© future, and that as soon as the railway congestion problem straightened itSelf out. "Indeed,'' said Major Norton, "not Only will it be 'possible,' but I, believe that, the Government will sooner or Inter make it compulsory for: the produce a district needs to bo landed at the most' convenient and suitable port, in orderto cope in some measure with th.e Tailway trouble. Does it not on the face of it seem ludicrous to send the produce to London, and then all the way bnck-:to Bristol, to Cardiff, and up to Birmingham, when it could be so much more expeditiously • and ecajiomically handled nit' Bristol Why, the presentday railway charges, alone answer the question. There was a time when,produce landed! in tho London .dock 6 was railed to ; Bristol within a ; week; now one is lucky to get it in three months, and every- day almost the railway 1 and cartage cost is leaping up—all in favour of the Bristol and Dominions Producers' Association's nearest-port argument. And when on top of i that the : producers eliminate the middleman, and are put into direct touch: with the retailer ' who handles his goods, tho question as to which system is preferable seems to me to be completely answered.

Congestion at London Docks. . The problem of the shocking congestion 'at the London docks during the f past year should not, according to Major -Norton, present! insurmountable difficulties. It' could be summed up in one worddecentralisation. Whilst h« occupied tho position of Trade Commissioner for South Australia the conviction forced itself upon his mind that to consign' all or even the bulk of overseas produce direct to London was a radically unsound policv, detrimental to producer and consumer alike, though very, beneficial to importers and wholesale distributors •who-desired to conltrol the. markets. This centralisation—as the present state of the London docks proved—made for congestion, delay to shipping, increased cost ol distribution, and inevitably higher price, to consumers, especially those outside tue port's natural area of distribution .Before the war there vas a growing demand on the part of the great provincial ports, backcd bv. the High Commissionere for the Overseas Dominions, for more frequent; regular, direcfi steamship c?minunieation with the Dominions. Vested interests opposed a these advocates of decentralisation.. Only slight and utterly inadequate concessions were won from the shipping companies by dint of hard fighting.' The war unfortunately checked tho movement and prevented progress. But the demand was reviving. The provincial ]x>rts had solid facie to support their claims admitted that Liverpool, Bristol, Hull, and Glasgow possess every facility in tnc way of docks and warehouses for handling a much larger volume o. trade. Wot only were they large centres of consumption; Ithey were also—what was far more important to the issue-very large centres of distribution. The system of decentralisation applied not to ""ports al°n°ib would materially benefit our export trade. > If a better direct service were established between our progressive provincial ports and the Dominions, to say nothing of other markets, manufacturers in the Midlands and the industrial districts generally would be heavy extra expense and delay of foujard- , incr their poods by rail to London. They would naturally select the nearest port. In the case of heavy bulky goods and non-perishable merchandise advantage rould be taken of the cheap means of transit offered by our greatly neglected canal system.

Direct Touch With Retailer. , "What I (lo want-to emphasise." said Major Norton, "is that wo put the producer alongside the retailer, and hero is somdthing to prove it. I was with "n producer from Australia one day explaining..our aims, methods, and what wo had accomplished,' and. he that the' association should pamphlet, explaining the great work it which wm handed to our representative, showed, in an attractive form, that the association was mating sood its words. It contains, illustrations of the Associations offices, ana huge five-storied packing warehouse in Bristol, where New Zealand honey alia \merican syrup is packed in.tins.bearing labels plainly showing' the country of origin; The association had commenced packing with a man and a boy, now over a hundred were employed in the big : packing-house alone, then fol.owed on ' leaf after leaf of photogrftphs of special window displays of New Zealand goods. One shop window was really bcautituliy I arranged, tho top half of the window being devoted to an extensive mountain and forest' scene, with a map of New Zealand superimposed, and across its centre, in an oval Met, tho words, "Finest New Zealand Honey," whilst lielow was a well-stocked show of New Zealand honey in clean, clearly-labelled cartons. That window was' only typical of many hundreds throughout the Kingdom. Another leading! sliop window in Weston-super-Mare, \v*ns devoted to ft display of l New Zealand jams, writ largo with, tho familiar "li" of the home. Another j showed a fine display of New Zealand meat, with the sign, ' We Roll New Zealand Mutton," prominently exhibited, showing at a glance that the association 1 was making' the country of origin a cardinal principle of its business.