CANADIAN PRODUCERS

Evening Star, Issue 19781, 3 February 1928, Page 10

CANADIAN PRODUCERS

RESENTMENT AGAINST AUSTRALIAN TRADE TREATY Press Association—By Telegraph—Copyright. OTTAWA, 'February 1. A sharp, attack was made on the Australian Trade Treaty in the House of Commons this afternoon by l)r Peter M'Gibbon, Conservative membel- for .Muskoka, who said that the treaty provided radical reductions u> the tariff on Canadian commodities notably butter. What, he asked, hat* been the effect? In 1924 the imports from Australia amounted to over 1.000. dollars, and the exports to Australia 19,000,000 dollars. In the imports from'Australia had risen to 0,000,000 dollars, and the exports had fallen to 8,000,000 dollars. Tli“ importations of butter from Australia and New Zealand had risen to 10.000. per year, and the price paid to the Canadian farmer had dropped 13c to 14c per lb. Was if, lie asked, a patriotic thing to import such a large quantity of butter from these dominions while the Canadian farmer suffered? He hoped some person would rise and demand that the treaty should be modified. TRADE TREATIES DENOUNCED. CLASS ISSUE RAISED. OTTAWA, February 2. (Received February 3, at 10 a.m.) Criticising the Australian treaty in the House, Mr John Evans (Progressive, Roestovvn) said it was the height of folly, whetlier it was done by a statesman or a lunatic, to increase the burden on the people by a trade treaty. The Australian pact was negotiated by the present Government in the interests of a small class of Canadian manufacturers to the detriment of the consuming public. He made a general attack on the principle of tariffs, calling Protection an economic policy designed for the advantage of a single class. The last session of Parliament was a rich man’s feast. Trade treaties were part of the old game of class privilege. The work of the Tariff Advisory Board showed the utter absurdity of ‘maintaining a tariff on the necessaries of life and the implements of production.

HEW ZEALAND BUTTER IN CANADA

“ DESTRUCTIVE COMPETITION " COMPLAINED OF [From Ons Correspondent.] VANCOUVER, January 9. The thorny problem of how to combat the intrusion of the superior and much-sought butter from New Zealand and Australia into Canada is proving a puzzle to the dairy interests of British North America, but the butter is being lavishly advertised in most of the Eastern Canadian daily newspapers, and .is being sold readily at 42 cents per lb. delivered in Montreal, Toronto, ami other large centres of population in Canada. In an illuminating article iu the Montreal ‘Daily Star’ the following occurs:—“ With the growth of population in Canada and the rise of great industrial and commercial centres the domestic market for dairy products becomes of more importance to farmers. It is coming to pass in this country, as in the United States, that the home market for dairy products is the most dependable, is the one to be cultivated and supplied with what it demands, iov in so doing the producer, builds up a consuming market, which prefers the butter and cheese to which it has been trained in taste. The home market tor milk and cream is secure, as also the local and domestic market for the milk and cream required for the making of milk products. ' “The heavy decrease in exports of Canadian butter to the United Kingdom during the year of 1927 gives cause for concern. Canadian cheese continues to hold its place in the British market, but it would appear that competition and reduced prices ottered make the export markets less attractive for Canadian butter. Under these circumstances it becomes a special object of concern to the farmers, and particularly to those who specialise in dairy products, that the home market shall he secured to them. The superior Canadian creamery butter is likely to command a better price than imported butter. The argument put forward by the National Dairy Council against the present terms on imported butter to this market, whether the butter is actually brought in or not, suggests the necessity of careful inquiry into the operations of the market and the competition offered. Options in butter, as in wheat, undoubtedly affect prices up and down. “ It will be conceded that production of dairy products in New Zealand, with its moderate climate, which cheapens the cost of caring for stock in comparison with the costly barns and housing winter quarters and care required m this country, should be considered in any fair survey of the situation. It might become advisable to meet the request of the Dairy Council lor restoration of conditions as they were prior to 1925, at least to the extent of providing for operation and application of an anti-dumping measure in any time of movement of dairy products which threatened destruction of the domestic market. Healthy competition is one thing, but destructive competition is quite another. REASON FOR INQUIRY. “ When New Zealand butter can be offered in Montreal after being brought thousands of miles for 3 cents a pound cheaper than the minimum price at whicli it can be profitably produced in Canada, there would seem to he reason for inquiry into the effect of present conditions. “ It is highly desirable to maintain the trade pact with Australia and New Zealand, but it would seem reasonable, in a time when special should be made to develop domestic industries, that Canada should point out that while continuing the trade pact she will give it an interpretation under a provision against dumping at excessively low prices. It is important to Canadians to maintain the strength of the home production in dairy products as the best guarantee of fair prices both for the producer and the consumer, and the policy of Protection cannot be defended successfully unless we recognise the just claims of the farming industry.”