NEW ZEALAND MEAT CONTROL.

Shannon News, 27 March 1925, Page 1

NEW ZEALAND MEAT CONTROL.

An interesting outline of the work of the Meat Producers Export Control Board was given at the Canterbury Agricultural and Pastoral Association the other day by the chairman of the Board, Mr. David Jones. The information given is all the more interesting when comparing the past activities of the Meat Board, with the prpposed action of the Dairy Control Board in so far as 'the chairman of the Meat Board claims to have practically achieved by a control and regulation of shipping, the very objects aimed at by the Dairy Control Board.

‘‘The regulation of shipments,” said Mr. Jones, “was the most important duty undertaken by the board, and it was one of the functions to which it gave most attention. The board fully recognised that the regulation of supplies to the British market was one of the most important' factors in stabilising prices. The board made its shipping arrangements for the supply of freight to suit the killing months and also the requirements of the Smithfield market. These shipping arrangements must be made months ahead of the loading dates, so as to enable the shipping companies to arrange their vessels.”

Mr, Grounds, when speaking in Palmerston North the other day made the statement that shipping arrangements have to be made four months ahead and that it is a matter of sheer impossibility to gauge the British market at such a distance ahead. "The Meat Board has no doubt found out by now that there is no need to gauge the market requirements within a few tons'of produce. All that is necessary is to avoid shipping 10,000 tons one month and 1,000 tons another mbntli. Denmark does ’not regulate her supply by shipping but by production, and summer or winter sends forth within a “narrow margin the same quantity of butter. it is the excessive quantity of dairy produce which leaves this country at certain times of the year, that plays havoc with prices, a fact that is borne out by the Meat Board’s experience.

“If large quantities of meat were sent Home which the market could not absorb,” Mr. Jones points out, “It would mean having to store the surplus at the London end, which would involve additional costs, particularly as the present cost of storage in London is excessive whereas we have ample storage in .the -Dominion to hold our meat at' practically little cost”

With regards to the high cose of storage in London, the came applies to dairy produce as does to meat. We have beeifli told repeatedly that butter and cheese must be held in London to profit by any rise in the market The objective should be to prevent a fall rather than, hold for a rise, for when there is no fall there will be no need for a rise. Large quantities of produce held on the spot has a depressing effect on the market and antagonises consumers who invariably look upon it as exploitation and profiteering. ;

Elimination of Speculative Dealing. •‘Large quantities of meat going on to any market did not necessarily mean that it would be of benefit to the consumer in the way of lower prices,” said Mr. Jones > *‘Jt might have the immediate effect of lowering wholesale prices, enabling speculators to stock up, but it would not necessarily mean correspondingly lower prices to consumers. The regulation of shipments was going a long way towards cutting out this speculative dealing, which had been so detrimental to the trade in the' past. That was the whole position. The board was getting closer to the consumer by the elimination of a lot of unnecessary intervening costs and profits between the producer and the consumer, which must eventually benefit both.” Meat from Manchuria.

An interesting sidelight is thrown on the operation of large firms and combines in circumventing artificial restrictions placed on their activities and operations. Although we may be priding ourselves in New Zealand on keeping out, or at least impeding the progress of the foreign meat trusts, it is a recognised fact that New Zealand meat is more or less at their mercy on the Smithfield market. What is more, by restricting their buying facilities in New Zealand, they divert huge capitals to other countries bringing supplies from such sources in direct competition with New Zealand producer. Mr. Jones tells us for instance that Manchuria was now shipping meat to Smithfield, 82,000 carcases having been exported in 1923, and 106,000 carcases in 1924, most of them being wethers. The shipments usually arrived about December, when the market was bare. Practically all this meat shijpped from Manchuria belonged to Vestey Bros.”

This is a lesson that should bo taken to heart by the Dairy Control Board, which, after their extensive investigations should be aware of the fact that New Zealand is not the only butter on the beach.