JAM FROM AUSTRALIA

Taranaki Daily News, 2 August 1921, Page 5

JAM FROM AUSTRALIA

IMPORTATTOX PROHIBITED* FEARS OF DUMPING. PROTECTING LOCAL INDUSTRY By Telegraph.—Press Association. Wellingion, Last Night. An Order-in-Council was issued this evening prohibiting the importation of Australian jam and fruit pulp. The temporary embargo is not an arbitrary interference with trade, hut is directed towards the pr-esevation of the important industries and the prevention of unemployment within the Dominion. The people engaged in and dependent upon fruit-growing and subsidiary industries, such as jam manufacturing, have recently been seriously embarrassed by the fact that the Australian Government declined to grant a rebate of £2O per ton oh all sugar used by Australian manufacturers in the production of good- for export. This step would result in flooding the New Zealand markets, the nearest dumping ground, with jams and preserves, and already dumping from Australia has been serious in these and other commodities.

It is not suggested that the decision of the Commonwealth Government was made with a view to facilitating dumping. but that it followed represeniat ons from the Australian fruit-growers and jam manufacturers. After receiving numerous complaints from all parts oi New Zealand, the Hon. J. G. Anderson, acting-Minister of Industries and Commerce, was advised from a reliable source that there were huge quantities of jam carried over from last year and that there were accumulations in both Melbourne and Sydney. Also there were colossal stocks held in London. The Australian export trade with. London jind the East was reported, to be übso- ’ lutely dead and the local trade depresst ed. Australian merchants were looking for fresh outlets and New Zealand i presented the most accesdiuie field for I exploitation. I That the danger to the New Zealand fruit-grower is a real one may be real ised when it is known that over 17,090 tons of fruit pulp is held in Australia to-day waiting for a market. The Australian Government’s rebate on sugar for manufacturing purposes ie a serious menace to fruit-growing and allied industries in New Zealand, and if Australian dumping is allowed to' proceed irreparable injury will be inflicted upon | the fruit-growing industry land all secondary industries connected therewith. The fruit-growing industry is already having a very hard struggle and any serious setback such as would result from Australian dumping of .Jams, pulp and preserves will seriously threaten the position of many growers, unless the I fruit-growers can dispose of the bulk of their crop within New Zealand for jammaking and preserving purposes, and the interests of many growers, including numerous returned soldiers recently settled on the land, will be sacrificed. Jam manufacturers are already stocked with considerable quantities of fruit from last season's crop and there is keen I competition for sales within the Dornin- ■ ion itself and if dumping of imported i jams prevents the disposal of the New i Zealand stocks jam manufacturers will not be in a position to place further orders with the fruit-growers for an indefinite period. In the Government’s view there is ample power in the Board of Trade Act for the interests of the consumers to he safeguarded in respect to price.