The Superfluous Banana

How “Gentleman’s Agreement” is Operating Between Fiji, Samoa, Tonga, and New Zealand Written for “Pacific Islands Monthly" by C. B. Joske, president of the Fiji Banana Association.

ONCE Australia bought large quantities of most excellent bananas from Fiji, and sold Fiji large quantities of flour. Then Australia began to grow her own bananas, and gradually she shut out the Fijian product. But she continued to sell flour to Fiji.

The Ottawa Agreement provided that, if Aus tralian products were to enter Fiji, some Fiji pro ducts must be admitted to Australia. Australia reluctantly allowed 40,000 centals of Fiji bananas to come in, per annum.

Australian consumers gladly paid, for the luscious Fiji fruit, from 20 to 50 per cent, more than they paid for the flavourless, uninteresting Australian banana.

The Fiji quota was only 2 per cent, of Australian production; but Australian banana-growers raised a clamour, and various “underground engineers” got to work. The bureaucrats “threw everything at the Fiji trade except the kitchen stove.” The Fiji imports escaped import duties, but were forced to pay primage, sales tax and income tax. The spirit of the Ottawa Agreement was flagrantly broken; but the politicians, with one calculating eye on the banana-growers’ votes, were cunningly silent.

Fiji refused to be a mere catspaw. The Fiji Government proposed to place, on Australian flour entering Fiji, an impost equal to primage, sales tax, and income tax.

That started something. The Australian flour millers made a strong protest. Australian wheat growers are vastly more important than Australian banana-growers. The Australian Government, in mid-November, decided that Fiji bananas, to tha extent of 40,000 centals per annum, should be free from primage and sales tax.

The Fiji-Australian banana trade will start again, presently. Meanwhile (Nov-Dec.) the Australian banana-growing interests are very busily promot ing a savage agitation against the removed of the primage and sales tax.

Major Clive B. Joske, of Suva, whose ceaseless representations have been responsible for Aus tralia’s belated recognition of her obligations under the Ottawa Agreement, describes, in the following article, the position of the banana-growing indus try in the South Seas.

AS recently as twenty years ago, in that halcyon period which the modern generation call rather pityingly “Pre-war,” there used to be a flourishing industry in Fiji—the export of bananas. Countless thousands of bunches were shipped to Australia and New Zealand and first-class fruit was sold in Sydney, Auckland, and other cities at sixpence a dozen.

In the language of Hollywood, Came the War. Australia became obsessed with the idea of nationhood and national self sufficiency. New Zealand sipped of the same heady wine and acquired a mandate over Samoa. These are the underlying causes of the decline in the banana industry of Fiji and the results have been the closing of the Australian market for years entirely to Fiji-grown bananas, coupled with the gradual restriction of the New

Zealand market in order to make room for bananas grown in Samoa.

The developments in Australia conse quent upon the Ottawa Agreement are well-known. It is sufficient to comment upon the extraordinary situation in which the Australian Prime Minister must find himself in negotiating with the British Government. Britain has an agricultural problem of her own and, in the interests of her own producers, seeks to limit the amount of Dominion produce entering her markets. Australia appears to deny Brit ain the right of regulation but to claim for herself such a right in respect of Colo nial produce imported into Australia.

In New Zealand, the situation is more logical. The Administration of Samoa has become increasingly a financial problem to N.Z., owing to the calamitous falls in copra and cocoa. Years ago, Samoa pro duced bananas in limited quantities and, naturally, in recent years attention has been directed to supplying New Zealand with Samoan bananas. The local Admin istration has fostered the industry and built it up by controlled marketing. It has been a costly business and even en tailed the building of a special ship, the

“Maui Pomare," to deliver the fruit in good order by means of insulated space, etc.

In 1932, banana production in Fiji and in Samoa had increased to the point where it had exceeded the demand from New Zealand. Shippers received from the sales of their bananas hardly sufficient to cover the cost of freight to New Zealand. A

state of affairs developed which made all concerned realise the urgent necessity of th© division of the New Zealand market between the Samoan and the Fijian interests.

In 1932, therefore, a “gentleman’s agreement” was made under which it was arranged that in each year for the months from October to April, Fiji and Tonga should ship 16,000 cases per month to the Auckland market; whilst Samoa should ship 15,000 cases per month to the South Island cities. During the winter months, from May to September, the quantities were to be reduced to 12,500 cases per month. As exemplifying the spirit of the

relationship between New Zealand and Fiji, it is worthy of note that no porten tous, solemnly sealed treaties ratified by Parliament were thought either desirable or necessary. It was the type of agree ment where good will and good faith are infinitely better than good law-in fact, the arrangement has been worked with sympathetic consideration on both sides, and helped by the friendly feelings be tween the Dominion and the Crown Colony, With the continued fall in copra and the surplus production of bananas in Samoa it has become increasingly evident in the past few months that the New Zealand Government would have practically no

option but to allocate to Samoa an in creased share of the market for bananas; in New Zealand. Early this year the Governor of Fiji (Sir Murchison Fletcher, K.C.M.G., C.B.E.) visited New Zealand to discuss this, and other problems with the Government of N.Z., whilst just recently Mr. A. B. Ackland, of the Department of Agriculture, went across for personal dis cussions with Mr. Behrendsen of the N.Z.

Department of External Affairs.

The N.Z. officials said in effect to the Fiji representatives: “Here is our problem in Samoa; these are the facts. What would you do under such circumstances'?’’’

Such a presentation of the case is difficult to answer and Fiji realized that it was in fact unanswerable during the currency of the Ottawa Agreement, whereby her hands, are tied in respect to offering a greater share of Fiji’s import trade to N.Z. in return for the right of entry of Fiji ba nanas into N.Z.

It was, therefore, not unexpected that both Governments should announce a cut in the quota for bananas from Fiji, coupled with an increase in the Samoan quota. In 1935, the Fiji-Tonga quota during January- April and October-December is to be 1 reduced from 16,000 cases to 12,000 cases —a cut of 25 per cent. During the winter months the quota is to remain unchanged.

a concession that is more apparent than real, as it is during these months that prices fall to their lowest in New Zealand and shippers receive less than they have actually paid for the fruit. During May the cut is from 12,500 to 9,000, approxi mately 20 per cent.

During 1935, the banana exports from Fiji-Tonga to New Zealand will be reduced in total from 174,000 cases to 143,500 cases.

Of this quota, 114,800 cases will be allotted to Fiji and 28,700 cases to Tonga. From 1936 to 1939 the reduction is more severe, since the cut will be applied in regard to the winter months as well. The total N..Z imports from Fiji-Tonga will then be limited to 119,500 cases per annum—Fiji 95,600 and Tonga 23,900. What Fiji-Tonga lose is given to Samoa.

In 1933 and 1934 Fiji exported to New Zealand roughly 142,000 cases per annum; from 1936 onwards this is to be reduced to 95,600 cases, a fall of approximately

Major C. B. Joske..

33 1-3 per cent. On the basis of the values ruling at present, the Colony’s income will be reduced by approximately £20,000 per annum.

What will be the effects? In Fiji itself, the Government is faced with the awk ward problem of allocating the reduced quota amongst the various areas producing bananas within marketable reach of Suva.

It is obvious that the potential earning capacity of the Fijians in those districts must be revised and their taxation low ered, with a corresponding reduction in social and other services rendered. Gov ernment policy has been to give to the Fijians 75 per cent, of the export quota and to the other races 25 per cent. In practice this has meant that over 20 per cent, of the export quotas have been given to Chinese growers. Here is another tick lish problem—if the Fijians are unable to sell all the fruit they can grow should the other races be given any vested interest in what is really a basic industry to the Fijian? If and when the Australian mar ket recovers, it seems probable that the Chinese growers will be able to secure a larger proportion of the Fiji quota—they have an inherent advantage by reason of their fruit being grown in plantations and therefore subject to better supervision as regards the uniformity of packing and grading, a point of disadvantage for Fijian grown fruit.

It is likely that the number of Euro pean shippers will decrease and eventually the export quotas will perhaps be concen trated in very few, but responsible, hands.

Since the Fiji Government decides the prices to be paid to the Fijians, the Euro pean shipper has in recent years become merely the collector of the fruit and the distributor of the proceeds, the Govern ment for all practical purposes fixing his salary. The Union S.S. Co. will find the loss of some thousands of pounds in an nual freight earnings, a serious considera tion in the case of the Waipahi and some rearrangement of their Island services seerAS inevitable.

So the once flourishing industry of Fiji has faded and withered. But the banana is an annual crop—or practically so. Ac cordingly, each year brings a change in the industry, and it is quite conceivable that twelve months hence the banana industry in Fiji may be sprouting vigorously from some fresh “eye.”

The October-December number of the Australian Museum Magazine contains many articles of interest to nature-lovers. Of interest to Pacific Islands people is an article on the “Tattooing of the Motu Tribe, Papua,” by Mr. Roland V. Old ham, of Yule Is., dealing with the patterns, implements used, and traditions surrounding this dis appearing art.