FRUIT EXPORT

Hokitika Guardian, 10 April 1929, Page 7

FRUIT EXPORT

PACIFIC ISLANDS TRADE

A I.LEG ATIONS REl'Ll ED TO

Alleging tlmt the activities of the Fruit Control Hoard had proved harassing to those fruitgrowers who had for some years been supplying applies to Honolulu and other Pacific islands, a writer in the Auckland “Star” says: “Since the hoard was formed they have been compelled to do this business under the jurisdiction of that body. In other words, each case of apples has to hear the Government label, and the shipper has to pay his share of the export levy issued by the hoard. The Government guarantee made for fruit shipped to Britain and Europe has not boon sought. Nevertheless shippers to Honolulu who also send fruit to Hntain or Europe are compelled to include the Pacific consignments in the general pool and return to the general fund any extra profits that may have been made in the Hawaiian trade. Not being included in the guarantee, they claim that they should not he made to join the pool. Moreover, it is contended that the present policy is likely to lead to the cessation of a trade which though not of great dimensions has in the past been profitable to orchardists in Auckland and other centres of the North Island.”

Replying to the allegations, the secretary of the Fruit Control Hoard (Mill. K. Napier) remarked that the board since it came into operation in 1024, had not exercised control of any kind over shipments to Honolulu and other Pacific islands. The question was considered some considerable time ago. but in view of the fact that Auckland merchants were conducting a satisfactory trade with these markets, the hoard did not consider it necessary to take any action, and left the Honolulu and Pacific Island trade entirely to private enterprise to foster. The Auckland merchants were fully aware of the actual position, and would agree that at no time had the hoard intofered with the business they were conducting. Under the Act, the export levy was payable on all fruit exported from the country, and the Auckland merchants agreed to be responsible for the export levy on the fruit shipped b them to these markets. An infereroe was made in the article that tin l hoard was responsible for each case of apples hearing the Government label, and for the Pacific consignments being in a general pool for the purposes of the guarantee; any export profits made on the Hawaiian trade !>'■ ing refunded to the general fund. The whole of these matters came under tbjurisdiction of the Departmnt of Agriculture', hut said Mr Napier, it wa* just as well to clear up any misundering which may exist.

“Tin* Government,” lie said, “ have generously given to tin* fruit industry a guarantee of a certain return per case, and although this guarantee* is now lived at such an amount that it is most unlikely that the country will Incalled upon to financially assist growers at all. nevertheless the guarantee, is of considerable value in assisting to finance the shipments of the grower. This guarantee is given to the bona lide fruitgrower and is given over the whole of his export trade. This is absolutely a ifair condition in that the Government should not he called upon to pay out on the guarantee because of fruit: shipped by any grower to one market bringing a poor price, whereas fruit shipped by the same grower to another market may bring a price com siderably higher than the guarantee. “The guarantee is based on the average of each grower’s fruit export-* od to all markets, and if it should happen that there is a surplus to the Pacific, with a loss on shipments, say. to the Gnited Kingdom, the Government maintain, and rightly so, that this price should Ik* averaged with respect to that grower before the Government are called upon to make any pnvmon!. “The fruitgrower is unite at libert" to shin entirely outside the Government guarantee, and if lie does, the result will bo exactly the same as if he shipped under the guarantee, except that iif a loss takes place over the whole of his shipment he would not be protected.”