EXPORT OF MEAT.

Taranaki Daily News, 2 December 1921, Page 5

EXPORT OF MEAT.

ARMOUR’S WANT LICENSE. PETITION TO THE PREMIER. THE REPLY POSTPONED. By Telegraph —Press Association. Wellington, Last Night. A deputation of farmers, mainly representing the South Island, waited on the Prime Minister and the Minister of Agriculture this morning to present a petition asking that an export meat license be issued to Armour and Co., of Australasia, Ltd. Mr. J. Bitchener, M.P. for Waitaki, introduced the deputation, which was headed by Sir John Findlay. Mr. W. I. Carney, manager for Armours in New Zealand, presented the petition, whch he said was signed by 7863 persons, who owned 9,213,406 sheep -and 53,000 head of cattle. The petition asked that Armour and Co. be granted permission to export from New Zealand to any 1 country meat now held in the freezing works; also that Armour and Co. be granted a meat license, “as we are of opinion that by not allowing them to carry on business in the open market fair competition for our produce is thereby restricted-.” Mr. Carney explained that Armours held carcases in New Zealand because the company could not obtain a customs permit to export. Mr. Nos worthy asked if the people were aware when they signed the petition that Armour and Co. had an opportunity of sending their meat to Great Britain.

Mr. Carney replied that they were aware that the Government would permit them to export to a certain country. Mr. Nos worthy: “You have had an opportunity of shipping meat to Great Britain.” Mr. Carney: “Yon have not given me an opportunity to ship meat to Great Britain on an offer that I could accept.” ? LETTERS EXCHANGED. Mr. Reakes, Director-General of Agr’. culture, read portions of the corres pondence between the Minister and Mr. Carney in reference to this matter. On September 1 Mr. Carney wrote to the Minister saying Armour and Co. did not intend to avail themselves of the opportunity to ship meat to America and the Continent of Europe, and making an alternative proposal that if the Government would permit the immediate marketing of meat in store Armour and Co. would undertake not to kill further until the question of their license had been definitely determined. To this Mr. Nosworthy replied stating that a definite decision would be facilitated if this offer were amplified and sealed. The amplification suggested bound Armour and Co. not to purchase, ship or kill meat, or otherwise act as producers of meat in New Zealand, unless and until they had obtained a meat export license. To this Mr. Carney replied that aft?” consulting his directors the proposal could not be entertained. On September 14 Messrs. Garrick. Cowlishaw and Alpers, solicitors, wrote that they had Seen instructed by Armour and Co. to state that it was considered that the refusal of the Customs of a permit to export meat was illegal, and that the Government would be held responsible for any damage caused to the meat. This letter was referred to the SolicitorGeneral, who advised the action to be taken.

Sir John Findlay stated it appeared from the letters he read that the objection taken by Mr. Carney to amp’? fication was that it would prevent the company operating in New Zealand, except at the discretion of the Minister. Such a complete surrender of what the company conceived to be its rights was not contemplated, as the company had been advised by Messrs. Skerrett Findlay and Myers that a meat license was not necessary when meat was sold to purchasers outside the "country. A QUALIFIED OFFER. Mr. Nosworthy stated he had allowed meat to go first to America and then to the Continent, and it was on his suggestion that Mr. Carney approached th? Government with a further proposal on the lines on which he had indicated. The Government might allow meat to go to Great Britain. Mr. Massey: Did you understand you were making an offer to allow the meat to go out of the country on certain conditions ? Mr. Nosworthy: I understood that subject to their giving a letter on the lines indicated we would allow meat to go out. Mr. Carney said that if Mr. Nosworthy had given an indication earlier on the lines of his offer of October the position would have been entirely different. However, it was an export license that was required, and if they got that the meat in store coukl look after itself. Mr. Nosworthy said no Minister of the Crown would sit down to bargauP. He suggested the offer that might be made to the Government, “but 1 was not going to bargain with you. 1. told you that from the start.”

.Mr. Grigg asked Mr. Massey to give Armours a license for one year to give it a trial. If the license was refused he knew certain firms would supply all that Armours required iri London in such a way that the Government would not be able to prevent it. It would be better to have buying open and above board and under control than secretly, and a yearly license was a safeguard. Mr. Nicholson, secretary of the New Zealand Sheep farmers’ Federation, urged that competition should be encouraged. He understood that Armour and Co. would absolutely guarantee to abstain from attempting to control freezing works. PREMIER’S REPLY. The Prime 'Minister, replying, said it would be very much easier for the Government to say at once tL.it wmild aecede to the petition and grant a license to Armours. It the duty of (he Government to do everything in its power to encourage competition and increase prices, but it had at the same time to protect the consumers and the’ producers. This matter was thoroughly threshed out last year by a committee of the House, and the majority of the House backed up the committee in refusing to recommend the issue of a license. i’here was a suspicion in the minds of the people of the country in regard to what was known as the American meat trust, and he did not wonder at it. He ’’a- 1 r--’ ; ■ report of •ha _ —znission apjokxv. sr th V .

son Administration of the United States, which expressed very strong disapproval of the methods of the meal If we were satisfied that, no harm would result from what is proposed no objection would be raised to . the issue of a license. The deputation had put one side, hut he was informed that another petition was coming along to put the other side and oppose the issue of a, license. They had to do the best foi the whole of the producers and the country. When they had the two pet it ions he would bring them before Cabinet and endeavor to get a definite decision one way or the other. Mr. Grigg asked if the British Government had taken any action against the sale or purchase by American firms of meat in London. Mr. Massey replied that so far as he knew no such action had been taken, against tne American Meat Trust. There had been difficulty, through the tariff wall erected by America, which kept out meat from all other countries. They must remember that meat was sent to America last year and afterwards shipped to London, where it started a glut. He expressed the opinion that it was a very foolish thing on the part of the meat trust to endeavor to influence the N T ew Zealand Government through the British Government. New Zealand might make mistakes, but. it was prepared to take the consequences, and it would not allow any other country o influence the legislation in this Dominion’. Mr. Carney asked why American competition was welcomed in the purchase of hides, wool and all other lines of produce except meat. Was it because the opposition came largely from freez-‘ ing company interests? The Prime Minister said that could not. be discussed.