MARKETING PROBLEMS

Evening Post, Volume CXVII, Issue 62, 14 March 1934, Page 11

MARKETING PROBLEMS

THE TARIFF ISSUE

BRITAIN'S POLICY

The discussion on the problems affecting the dairy industry was continued yesterday afternoon at the conference called by the Government to jonsider ways and means of improv|ng the present depressed state of dairying in the Dominion. Two or three schemes were put forwad, and the conference went into committee to discuss the various schemes for the rehabilitation of the industry. The question of tariffs was referred to by the Minister .of Finance (the Br. Hon. J. G. Coates), who stated that New Zealand could not hope to obtain a separate agreement with the United Kingdom by offering tariff concessions,1 as it had been the traditional policy of Great Britain to treat all Dominions alike. Mr. B. Roberts (Parkville, Wairarapa) said that there was an urgent need for something to be done for the rank and file of the industry. The question of a quota could be" left-aside for the time being, because unless something was done, production would fall. At a W,airarapa meeting it'was decided that the only- thing that wouia help the farmer would be a national scheme, embracing all sections of the community. The first step needed was a mental readjustment, as advocated by President Boosevelt. CO-OPERATION URCJED. The individualistic opportunism which had been rampant for a number of years had worked itself out. It •was time that it was replaced by 'a cooperative system embracing the whole of the Dominion. His scheme, which had been endorsed by • the Wairarapa. meeting, was that the whole of the assets of the Dominion should be used for the basis of production of all sections of the community. They should separate export prices from the internal price level. It had to be remembered that the exporters were not paid in money but in goods, and thus ii was possible to have two price levels. "Up -to the present the farmers had received- the whole shock of international trade, and it was felt that the Government should be asked to place the dairy farmer in relatively the same position as other sections of the community. An internal price level would enable the dairy farmer to carry on and would Tve a fairer scheme than the manipulation of the exchange. He urged them to broaden the foundations of co-opera-tion which had been laid down by the pioneers and make New Zealand one complete whole, using the national assets for the welfare of the whole of the Dominion. If that was done they "would achieve a greater measure of production and prosperity. THE PRICE LEVEL. Mr; C. P. Agar (Canterbury) said he thought the conference should confine itself to the problem of how to raise the price level in the immediate future. The level could not be raised by the quota method, since it was obvious to those who had considered the matter fully that to restrict butter production and 'permit unlimited production of butter substitutes would merely undermine the butter market. He believed that with co-operation from the Imperial Government gome control of margarine might be achieved with mutual .benefit.-* They, could, not alter the,price, level in the United Kingdom, and therefore they had to consider ho\v^ to improve the price of butter-fat to the produoer. Mr. Agar suggested that the only method of approach was by Government subsidy, and that as soon as the timewaß opportune the 10 per. cent, exchange rate should be reverted to. When the exchange rate was raised he and a few others had pointed out to members' of Cabinet the danger of doing so without- having a string to the withdrawal of the higher rate from the various branches of the farming industry. He thought every fairminded farmer would,accept the statement that wool and meat growers did not require the higher rate, and that the dairy farmers required far more than a 15, per cent. rise. His • proposal was that, in addition to the 15 per cent, subsidy which the Government would give the dairy farmer with a return-to the old exchange rate, further assistance should be given to the industry either by way of subsidy or loan in order to stabilise.the price level for ' butter-fat during the lean years. The present conditions might continue for some years, and in view of that the -Government might say the cost of the scheme would be too great to contemplate, but he did not think that would be the case. He. believed that the difficulties of the industry would be greatly intensified if steps were not taken to raise money internally, in order to maintain a satisfactory price level to the dairy farmers. It was a fair question to ask the Government whether it would give the industry legislative authority to formulate a Dominion scheme for the marketing of dairy produce so as to raise the price level within New Zealand. The costs of Government, both national and local, were far too high, Mr. Agar said. It had been said that the Government was a partner in the dairy business, but it was a very expensive T .rtner. If th& Government reduced those costs and examined the tariff position, particularly those protected industries . which were uneconomic, it would have done its part as the senior partner. STABILISATION SCHEME. Mr. A. G. Sinclair '(To Awamutu) said that there had been price-cutting on the local market with disastrous consequences, and there was a need for orderly internal marketing. He outlined the stabilisation scheme, details cf which have already been published. Mr. W.. Sunderland (Poverty Bay) said that if the shipments of New Zealand and Australian butter were more regular the question of a quota would not arise. The dairy farmers .had neglected the co-operative movement in England, and in view of the fact that that movement sold 60 per cent, of the total food supplies in the United Kingdom the matter was a serious one. He asked the Dairy Board to make- greater efforts to place butter in the Midlands, where the Danish butter had a wide market. Mr.W. lorns, chairman of tho New Zealand Export Control Board, said that they had had displays of New Zealand butter in hundreds of co-operative shops iri England. THE TARIFF ISSUE. The Minister of Finance (the Et. Hon. J. G. Coates) said it had been stated that New Zealand had missed an opportunity of obtaining a separate agreement with the United Kingdom by offering her • tariff concessions subsequent the Ottawa Agreement. "I want to say clearly and definitely," said Mr. Coates, "that Great Britain will not make a separate agreement with any one Dominion. She will not give to cue what she will not give to another. There has . been ample authentic evidence on this point, and J wish to make it perfectly clear." The question of tariffs^ he said, was Jan : economic one which was at present •being carefully-examined by a CommisjEion whose recommendations would oreach the Government shortly. A Tariff

Bill based on these recommendations .would bo introduced during the next session of Parliament. It had been stated that New Zealand had not carried out her part of the Ottawa Agreement, and he wished to deny that statement most definitely. New .Zealand had carried out every letter of the agreement as it had affected her, and had done so before any of the other Dominions. She had reduced the duties on certain commodities named in the agreement, and had also abolished the surtax on articles of United Kingdom manufacture. She had under the agreement undertaken an examination of her tariff, and if there had been any delay it had been due to the British manufacturer, who had asked for time to present his case before the Commission. -, It had been contended by Mr. Agar that the costs of government,should be reduced, and at the same ~ time he- had advocated a subsidy for the dairy farmer, Mr. Coates continued. However, Mr. Agar did not say specifically how tho costs should be brought down. It was all very well to make proposals in general terms, but it was another thing to make specific recommendations." Mr. Agar: "Will you follow them if I' do? ' . • Mr. Coates: I am not so sure that you are in a position to say how costs should be brought down. After all, we are. responsible men, and must take a responsible view of the position. It is easy to criticise1 when one does not have to carry the responsibility. It is a different matter to construct. Mr. Coates added that tho Government would be pleased to consider definite proposals fov the future wellbeing of the dairying industry. "We are here to co-operate," he said, "but it has to be remembered that we are hot only concerned with the farming industry but have ±o consider also the economic structure of the whole country. However, if the buying power of the dairy farmer is reduced to a loss it becomes anything but a wholesome factor in the Dominion, and if any measure can be taken towards readjustment they will be reflected in every section of the community. NO SEPARATE AGREEMENTS. "I want to emphasise again that Great Britain will not rrlake a separate agreement with New Zealand and leave the other Dominions out. Since the first Imperial1 Conference this has been the basis upon which these conferences have arrived at decisions." A voice: Do you mean'to say that if one Dominion raises her tariff she is not going to get any worse treatment than the.others? Mr. Coates: I say that.it does not matter how much lower our tariff is than that, of any other Dominion; we are not going to get any better treatment. ■ -~-■- ■ , A voice: Does that apply the other way? ■ . ; . ,- , " ■•. -. Mr. Coates said that tariff considerations would not weigh in favour of an agreement for one Dominion.- It was the traditional policy of the United Kingdom to discuss questions with the Dominions as a whole. Mr. W. J. Poison, M.P.: Yet Britain is prepared to make a separate agreement with small countries like Estonia. Mr. Coates: Yes, that is a foreign country; but all British Dominions are treated on the same basis. He said, that others who had. represented New Zealand at Imperial Conferences could substantiate what he had said; It was'almost the basis upon which Imperial Conferences arrived at general agreements. It might seem a defect, but there it was. The question of a separate agreement with tho United Kingdom did not come at all into the question of whether or not New Zealand's tariff required a complete overhaul.' Tariffs were a matter of internal., policy. New ' "Zealand's tariff was lpwerthari'thoso.tif'the other' Dominions—7a per "cent, .lower than that of Australia—and yet she could not make a different agreement from those made by the United Kingdom with other parts.of tho Empire. Mr. W. Grounds, a member of the Dairy Board, said that in his opinion New Zealand had missed a great opportunity of creating an" entirely mental environment by not offering further tariff concessions to Great Britain following the negotiations at Ottawa. He believed that they would have materially improved! the outlook towards New Zealand in Great Britain. BRITISH ATTITUDE. . The Prime Minister (the Bt. Hon. G. W. Forbes) said that Mr. Coates had correctly interpreted the attitude of the" British Government. He had been at a number of conferences with British Ministers/and it had been made clear repeatedly that tariff concessions would not weigh in" the slightest. They belonged to the/ British Empire, and' each part of the Empire received equal treatment from Great Britain. The conference then went into committee to consider the various proposals that had been submitted. The Prime- Minister, , before vacating the chair in- favour of the Minister of Agriculture (the Hon. C. E. Macmillan) said that as the quota proposal would not arise for two years they might very well consider other aspects of the industry such as internal and external marketing and the problems of improving the quality of both butter and cheese.