DEAR MEAT MYSTERY.

Taranaki Daily News, 24 January 1920, Page 8

DEAR MEAT MYSTERY.

A' "SUBSIDY" OP MILLIONS TO THE . FARMERS. FACTS AND FIGURES. DEMAND FOR AN INQUIRY INTO THE RECENT RISE IN PRICES. The London Daily News of November 19, 1919, says:— With the demand for lower coal and milk prices, dissatisfaction is expressed in many directions at the recent increase in meat prices. There is also a demand for an inquiry by an independent body similar to that now investigating the reasons for the charge of Is a quart for milk. Though the Ministry of Food points out that the increase in meat prices works out at an average of 2Jd a lb. on all joints, home-killed and imported, a member of the Consumers' Council stated yesterday that there is practically no increase in the price of best joints. Cheaper joints, he pointed out, were increased to reduce the margin between the dearer and the less costly joints, because it was feared that any increase of the former would drive the public off them. Tl.:= the Ministry of Food denies. THE NEW PRICES. The new prices were fixed by a joint conference of representatives of the Ministry of Food, the Board of Agriculture, and the Central Advisory Committee on Agriculture. The farmers and market (Tattle feeders, I am assured, demanded an increase which would have made a difference of 6d a lb. between home-k!i>-ed and imported meat prices. Instead, an increase equal to 3d a lb. was put on imported meat, which will provide, it is estimated, about 00 per cent, of the quantity for consumption this winter. It is not denied that this is virtually a sulbsidy to the British farmer, the total cost of which, to the consumer, is not officially disclosed. One estimate gives the figure of £5,000,000, but others consider this an underestimate—"many millions" is the vague term used by several authorities.

THE PLEA FOR INCREASE. The demand for the increase in the price to the home producer was based on the plea of substantial advances in the cost of labor, hav, roots, and oil calce feeding stuffs—the same argument used to "justify the increase in the price of milk. It is admitted on all hands that these costs have advanced, but no data can be obtained from either the Ministry of Pood or the Board of Agriculture to show the extent of these increases to the producer. If the increases had been fixed to give a reasonable profit to the least enterprising farmers, it would mean that the man of average enterprise is making a very good profit, and tlifc most successful one a very substantial margin. On the other hand, Labor lvpresenta- ; tives in close touch with both ihe Minis-' tries of Food and Agriculture claim that wages, in view of the greater employ•jnent of farm machinery to-day, have not advanced to the extent that the farmers contend. It is also pointed out that since the calculations were made on ; which the price of meat was raised, there has not been an unexpected improve-; ment in both roots and grass, and that', the mild weather of October, at any ratein the South and a large part of the! Midlands, has enabled cattle to be kept' outdoors for a longer period than usual. ( thus reducing to a minimum the costs of I artificial feeding stuffs where have! been given to cattle intended for tnei , markets. POOLING SYSTEM. The Ministry of Food denies that it will make any profit out of its purchases, of home-killed or imported meat this winter. Under its system of pcoling the prices of all meats, and by fixing a winter flat rate to consumers, it is accumu- ! lating a reserve fund from profits on all | its meat in order to cover the graduated prices guaranteed to home producers during the late winter and sprng. The Department declines to state the prices at which it i 3 buying imported meat, on the ground that the disclosure will handicap its agents in future purchases abroad.

The Ministry, I am informed, is not paying a farthing more per lb. for Kew Zealand beef and mutton than it did during the war. The contract with the latter Government to supply frozen lamb at 6'/ s d to 0»/ 2 d per lb., and frozen beef at 4'/ 4 d to 5d per lb. is still in force, and I understand that an average of 4d per lb. amply covers all costs of cold storage "down under," ocean transport, insurance, and incidental charges to this country. Australian prices are a fraction under those of New .Zealand. More meat vessels are on the ronte to Australia and New Zealand, and heavy arrivals from these countries, •which began a month ago, arc expected to continue until the end of December. One effect of the shipments from Australia is that Government cold stores in this country are practically full, and privately owned stores are three-parts fnlu In both cases the meats stored include? fair percentage of bacon, which is beifc rapidly cleared as the winter approaches to make room for Australian mutton afd I