WOOL CONTROL BOARD

Ashburton Guardian, Volume XLV, Issue 10167, 23 July 1924, Page 8

WOOL CONTROL BOARD

FARMERS DISCUSS QUESTION?.

(Per Press Association.) WELLINGTON, July 22. 'At the Farmers’ Union Conference l it was moved: “That a Wool Control] Board be formed with the object or the better get-up and marketing ol the Dominion clip by a system of uniform classing and minimum reserves. Mr J. G. Anderson (Pelorus Sounds) said that wool control was not a new idea. It had been carried out successfully both in America and Australia within recent years. The principle had already been laid down that tne producers should control shipping 01 the purpose of controlling freigi • They could not do that unless they controlled the produce, and all he was 'asking was that they should place wool on the same basis as the two other great staples, meat and buttei. It was impossible to have wool classed commercially on the farms. He was not proposing to interfere uith th present commercial channels, but all they wanted was to see that the wool was put on the Home market in the best possible condition. Even the wool brokers of the Dominion were now falling in with the scheme. As regards draft. on wool, this was a verv old orierance, and was costing the P ro “ ducers £BO,OOO per year. The cost of wool packs for which they were not paid bv the manufacturer was L9/,UUU, and this large sum was being annually presented to the manufacturers through lack of organisation on the part ot the producers. Ross (T© Kauwhata) seconded the remit, saying that he was utterly unable to understand the inconsistency of those who would cutter a meat pool and a dairy pool and yet oppose a wool pool. - , Mr" J. B. Dick (Seddon) said that "90 per cent, of the wool was sold in Tsew Zealand, and that once it was sold it was out of the producers’ hands; therefore the scheme would be of no advantage in controlling shipping freights , ~ Mr G. L. Marshall (Marton) said that there was no call from woolgrowers for a pool, and until there was one there was no occasion to worry about the matter. Mr C. C. Munro (Clevedon) said that they should wait to see how the existing boards panned out before saddling themselves with further responsibilities. There w r as just a tendency to involve themselves in too much , rod tane. Mr A. E. Harding (Auckland) said he did not want to see the motion defeated, lest all impression he created that farmers were opposed to tile cooperative marketing principle, to which they were committed. On liis motion, further discussion on the question was postponed until tomorrow.