WOOL MARKETING

Wairarapa Times-Age, 20 March 1943, Page 2

WOOL MARKETING

POSITION OF NEW ZEALAND FARMERS t f COMMENT ON CONFERENCE PROCEEDINGS. ATTITUDE OF POLITICIANS. In a talk with a “Times-Age” reporter, Mr L. T. Daniell, of Masterton, had some comment to make on the wool marketing position arising from the recent meeting called by the Hutt Valley-Makara branch of the New Zealand Farmers’ Union, when it was decided to take legal action to test the validity of the action of the Government m withholding part of the wool price increase. “Mr Ben Roberts, as usual, loses sight of the main issues and by red herrings es us to do the same,” said Mr Daniell. Oui case is based on a demand for world parity. It was agreed by Mr Nash m July, 1939, that Britain was to take over certain of our products in the event of war. The price was a matter of negotiation on world parity.” ‘•‘By November, 1939 (world prices were announced on December 5, 1939), Biitain was negotiating sales of wool to America and Canada. In both cases the governments came in and fixed prices on market parity, which are interesting when reduced to New Zealand exchange. The Canadian price was fixed at 45 cents a lb., which at the ruling exchange rate, equalled SOVad per lb. for New Zealand raw wool in New Zealand money. That is an interesting fact for those who accept 12’,<id per lb for them, raw, wool. The U S.A Government fixed price is 54 cents, which meant and still means in New Zealand money 3s 4'/2d per lb. for our raw wool. We get IZ'/ad per lb. The dairyman, under the British purchase plan, receives world parity for his products, the wheatgrower gets well above it; yet the woolgrower gets far below it. We have never enthused about this extraordinary contract, but when politicians base fresh attacks on such comical premises we feel that a protest is essential. . . , • „ “Mr Christie's intervention is a shocking political attempt to protect Mr Roberts and Mr Barclay with half-truths, continued Mi Daniell. “Australia had indicated her willingness to qxtend the wool purchasing. agreement for a few years after the war, but with the proviso that local manufacturers be charged 3d per lb. above the present purchase price, which is so very far below world parity. Mr Christie conveniently overlooks this proviso, as well as the fact that Australian manufacturers already pay 15 per cent above export parity. The row here started through the blunders of Mr Barclay, who insisted that New Zealand manufacturers should pay 15 per cent less than export parity and now demands the backing of the whole Labour Party to ge him out of the cockpit. With- the back seat drivers in the Labour movement he seems now more prisoner than pilot.”