Cook Is. Fruit War

N.Z. Parliamentary Inquiry

From Our Own Correspondent

Rarotonga, March 22.

THE slightly conspiratorial air with which advocates of the proposed Fruit Control Board went about their early pro ceedings has now given place to the satis fied mien of men who have definitely accomplished something.

On March 19, word was received from the Prime Minister that the petition re cently forwarded from here would form part of a parliamentary inquiry and thorough investigation into every aspect of the importation and sale of fruit into New Zealand.

The petition referred to contained 808 signatures of producers out of a possible 1000, and opponents of the Board were quick to point out that of these only 564 were names of registered growers or pos sessors of a distinct shipping “mark.”

Equally quick was the indisputable reply that had the local Land Court sat regu larly during the past ten years, the ma jority of these people would have estab lished separate titles to their land and automatically applied for shipping marks of their own instead of continuing to use those of other members of the family.

Further to strengthen their position, growers during the past month elected district committees, and, from these again, a “Rarotonga Growers’ Association,” created, in the words of its chairman, Mr.

William Mcßirney, to generally guard producers’ interests and take up the slack between soil and sale. Containing over three-fourths of the Island’s growers, such an organisation, if skilfully led and care fully regimented, could —and possibly will —form the nucleus of a new and progres sive movement for the betterment of con ditions, not only in the fruit industry, but in other quarters.

One of the chief difficulties confront ing the new Association is the raising of sufficient funds to send one or more dele gates to speak on their behalf before the Parliamentary Committee shortly to be held in New Zealand. Their original in tention was to obtain the money from the levy of Id per case on all fruit export ed from the island through the district packing sheds. The funds thus accumu lated are specifically for the purpose of maintaining the sheds in good condition and for the cost and upkeep of any machinery therein.

There has, however, been considerable elasticity in the interpretation of the term “for public purposes,” and members of the association are irritated by the Ad

ministration’s refusal to sanction a grant when comparatively recently payments have been allowed for (1) An honorarium to a retired Civil Servant; (2) a subscrip tion for the victims of the Napier earth quake; (3) expenses in connection with visits paid to Tahiti and New Zealand by certain local chiefs; and (4) a month or two ago, a substantial gift to the London Missionary Society’s new church at Ngatangiia.

Arguing that none of these expenditures could possibly be considered as in any way connected with, or beneficial to, the fruit trade, the association not unreason ably feels that the attitude adopted by the Administration cloaks a covert opposi tion to the Board, as advocated by the association.