THE MEAT POOL.

Taranaki Daily News, 10 February 1922, Page 5

THE MEAT POOL.

HOUSE PASSES THE BILL.

VARIOUS CLAUSES DISCUSSED.

NO IMPORTANT CHANGES. X; By Telegraph—Press Association. Wellington., Last Night. Consideration of the Meat Export Bill in committee occupied the House on resuming after lunch to-day. Mr. R. P. Hudson (Motueka) considered the hoard of control should belarger to do justice to the work it would have to do.

The Prime Minister, replying to a suggestion by Mr. T. M. Wiltord (Leader of the Opposition) sard tnat the interests of a third party, the consuming public, should have consideration in arranging representation on the board. He agreed the third party was not adequately protected, but he did not think it possible to make provision to that end in this Bill.

Mr. W. D. Lysnar (Gisborne) suggested stockowners should have power to remove a member of the board if found unsatisfactory. Mr. G. Witty (Riccarton) suggested the addition of an amendment providing for the election of one person representing Labor.

After further discussion clause 2 as amended was adopted on the voices. On clause eight (constituting a London agency of the board), Mr. R. W. Smith (Waimarino) urged that the personnel of the agency in London was not large enough.

Mr. Wilford said the Prime Minister’s suggestion that London firms would act in the distribution of our meat was not desirable. He understood the object of the pool was to do away with these old agencies, which had proved unsuitable. He suggested that one man and a couple of assistants would be able properly to look after our interests in London. THE LONDON AGENCY. The Prime Minister said the personnel of the London agency would be decided by the board. What they wanted was a man having sufficient authority to speak for the producers in any matter requiring adjustment in connection with the distribution of meat. There was no intention, to embark on retail trading. The clause was adopted on the

On clause nine Mr. Wilford moved an amendment providing that the prohibition of export shall be subject to conditions and exemptions to be specified later.

The Prime Minister thought it iftulesirable to thus limit the powers of the board. What was wanted was to get I the board into operation at once, and if i amending, legislation was found necessary it could be brought down next session. The amendment was lost on the voices. Dr. A. K. Newman (Wellington East) objected to th? power given to the board to prohibit export, as it would be used arbitrarily, and often to the detriment of individual companies. The Prime Minister replied that the hoard would be of no use if it had not extensive power. It was not conceivable that a board of competent men would do anything detrimental to any producer or concern engaged in the meat trade. The clause was adopted unchanged. On clause ten the Prime Minister moved an amendment providing for the protection of existing contracts. MIV G. VV. Forbes (Hurunui) asked if this would affect meat held by Armour and Co. Mr. Massev replied that he thought it would settle the difficulty as between Armours and the Government. The board would have to deal with that matter. The clause, with the amendment, was adopted on the voices. . On clause thirteen. Mr. Wilford asked if a levy was intended to be made on all meat exported or only on such meat as was controlled by the woard. The Prime Minister replied that it referred to all meat. ( QUESTION OF FINANCE.

A new sub-clause was added to clause 14 providing for security for advances to owners of meat exported. On clause 1.7 Mr. R. McCallum (Wairau) moved an amendment empowering the Minister to make advances from the Consolidated Fund, al) such advances, with interest at current rates, to be repaid from the levy provided for in clause thirteen. He urged that tnere should be a levy to provide sufficient funds to meet all claims, so that public moneys should pot be drawn upon. He contended that at present there were no means of compelling the producer to make good any loss sustained. The amendment was negatived by 4a votes to 14.

Mr. J. McCombs (Lyttelton) suggested that the amount to he Advanced by the Minister should be limited, say, to £1,000,000. The Bill, as amended, was reported with amendments, which were agreed to. . On the motion for the third reading Mr. L. M. Isitt (Christchurch North) said he did not like the Bill, as it involved one big commercial union acting in the interests of one section of the people. The Bill conferred power to exercise compulsion on producers to agree to sell under conditions with which he totally disagreed. It was inter-jr-rnce with the liberty of the subject. The Government could not make any 1 declaration as to the security of its ■markets. The big meat trade interests would not hand over particulars of their trade to the Government, and they would fight the pool to the uttermost, and what was known as the big five would, back them tip. The. Government was beginning at the wrong end. It should have started by putting matters oil a better footing at (.he London end. Mr. Massey said he did not expect to have to borrow or to lend in connection with the pool operating, as he believed the Government’s guarantee would be sufficient for banks financing the producers. , . , . a The Bill was read a third, time anti passed.