CANNED FRUITS AND JAM

Hokitika Guardian, 28 July 1930, Page 2

CANNED FRUITS AND JAM

MORE PROTECTION DESIRED . WELLINGTON, July 22. Messrs C. Milner and E. F. Lord, directors of S. Kirkpatrick and Co., Ltd., Nelson, to-day expressed disappointment that more protection had not been granted to Dominion fruitgrowers. There was not sufficient extra duty on dried fruits and fruit pulp, especially as ’ it wa.s recognised that ll ! b of dried fruit was equal to Gibs of fresh fruit. The' extra cluty placed on foreign jams did not a.ffect the. position because practically no jams cam© into the country from foreign countries. The chief outside competition in jams had been from South Africa, which enjoyed all the. British preferential tariff. “Our company is more concerned with protection for the canned fruit industry which it is now cstab'ishing in the Nelson district,” said Mr Milner. “It has invested £20,030 in a large orchard venture for the production of canning varieties of fruit not previously grown in the Dominion. It is. also busy reorganising and remodelling its factory for the purpose of catering for New Zealand’s requirements in canned fruit. Although the tariff has provided some extra protection from American competition, it still leaves the door wide open for canned fruit from Canada, Australia, and South Africa, which countries at the present time are supplying practically all New Zealand’s requirements of canned poaches and apricots. We know that the Government is anxious to assist the secondary industries, and we still belli eve that in the reconsideration of the tariff it will realise the necessity for further protection for tlije jam-making and fruit-canning industries, especially as the reciprocal trade agreements between Australia' and New Zealand are to he reviewed in the near future. It is from these two countries that the greater part of the competition in canned fruit and vegetables comes.”