THE MEAT POOL.

Hokitika Guardian, 4 May 1922, Page 1

THE MEAT POOL.

WORK OF THE BOARD. “WIDER AND BETTER MARKET.” WELLINGTON, May 1. It is claimed that the Meat Control Board lias accomplished good work in negotiating for reductions in the charges which Impose a heavy burden upon producers in this country, and reduce the return which they obtain for their labours; but the aggregate result of the hoard’s work is probably not realised, as tho concessions and reductions have been obtained singly.

Information made available by the Prime Minister yesterday gives the sum of these concessions for which, the hoard has been primarily or mainly responsible. Tlie concessions are : As from January Kith, freight on wool and sheepskins reduced by a farthing per lb.

April 3rd, shipping companies made a reduction of 22s (id per ton in the freight to the United Kingdom on tallow and pelts. April 10th, freezing companies agreed to the reduction of a farthing per lb in charges for slaughtering, freezing and storing beef. New Zealand railways made a reduction of 25 per cent in charge for the carriage of beef for export and live fat cattle for slaughter for export. Port of London Authority made a reduction of 3s 5d per ton in handling charges, and 3s per ton in rent, after 28 days.

As from May 15th, shipping companies make a reduction of id in the freights to the United Kingdom on beef.

These concessions in the aggregate represent a considerable sum of money, hut tlie Prime Minister pointed out that the formation and work of the board have not only been effective in reducing the cost of production, hut, according to English authorities, has had the effect of bringing other large centres of population into competition with London, and so providing a wider and more reliable market, as well as increasing the price of lamb and mutton, and even of beef to a certain extent, though the price of the latter is still vorv far from being remunerative. COST OF DISTRIBUTION.

It is evident that the agitation which arose in Britain ns the result of the New Zealand meat pool movement has directed attention to aspects of the trade that hithero escaped notice. The London “Statist,” in referring editorially to the meat import trade of Hritain, says:—“We hope tedoal very shortly with the question of the high cost of distribution of ally given commodity after it lias arrived in this Country. .Messrs Weddcl sav hardly anything about it in their report, and very few importers of commodities feel themselves compelled to make more than a passing comment on tlie subject. Tt is, however, a most important question, as we shall endeavour to show when opportunity offers. It is one of the causes militating against the reduction in the cost of living. It is of tittle use to the consumer, who ultimately pays all and every charges incidental to tho cost of production and distribution of any article, to tell him that the particular commodity lias been invoiced to and disposed ot by the importer at approximately the cost which prevailed in the period that preceded tho outbreak of the recent war. if lie lias to pay a price more than twice that prevailing during the war period.”