MEAT INDUSTRY

Hokitika Guardian, 4 January 1933, Page 5

MEAT INDUSTRY

IMPORT MARKINGS N.Z. OPPOSES APPLICATION. ’ (United Press Association-- By Electric Teiegraph—Copyright. 1 LONDON, January 2. The Ministry of Agriculture is hearing an application by the National Farmers Union for compulsory marking to indicate the origin of impor. ed meat. The New Zealand Meat Importers’ B-oaird, the Imported Meat Traders’ Association, and other organisations are opposing the application.

The National Farmers’ Union counsel isa-id New Zealand importers suggested that the granting of the application would infringe the Ottawa agreements. It wag very peculiar that the Australian Commonwealth Government favoured the application, if it could be done in a reasonable manner. He suggested it would further the spirt of these agreements, because it wais the prevalent desire to purchase Empire, in preference to- foreign produce. The people would be able to distinguish Australian from. Argentine beef. An order would give the Empire produce a gigantic advantage.

PROTEST FROM COMMONWEALTH CANBERRA, January 3. The Federal Government have cabled a strong protest to the British Ministry against the proposed ink-branding of meat by means of a rubber -stamp. The Federal Government lias also decided to co-operate with the New Zealand Meat Board in employing counsel to fight the scheme.

MISAPPREHENSION IN MARKING. (Received Jan. 4tli. at 9.30 a.m.) LONDON, January 3. At the meat- marking inquiry, Dr. Trotter, medical officer of health at Islington, said that the ordinary Londoner certainly thought that it was Canterbury (Kent), when buying lamb labelled “Canterbury.” During the last ten years there were fifty-one prosecutions at Islington for applying the wrong trade description on meat, and forty-five were successful.