PRODUCE PRICE SYSTEM

Ashburton Guardian, Volume 70, Issue 210, 21 June 1950, Page 7

PRODUCE PRICE SYSTEM

DAIRY SECTION VOTES FOR RETENTION

ONE DELEGATE FAVOURS ABOLITION '

(P.A.) WELLINGTON, June 20. Only one delegate to the annual conference of the dairy section of Federated Farmers to-day > voted for a remit which the chairman (Mr A. G. Alexander) said meant that the industry should give up the guaranteed price.

The result read: “That this conference demands the full proceeds of the sale of their produce overseas.” Mr H. E. Biyde, a member of the Dairy Products Marketing Commission, spoke strongly against it. Adoption of the remit was moved by Mr A. O’Halloran, for the- Otago provincial dairy section. A conference of that section and the main provincial conference had adopted it unanimously, he said. The dairy industry was the only industry contributing frorti its sole income to the stabilisation fund, Mr O’Halloran said. The industry to-day was merely an appendage of the State, the guaranteed price being only a wage structure and not comparable with returns from other sources. Describing the motion as dangerous, Mr B. C. O’Connor (Auckland) suggested that ‘'any amounts in , excess of the guaranteed price accruing on dairy produce should be paid to companies for retention in suspense accounts for the benefit of dairyfarmers. Money Safe “There has been some doubt on the safety of these funds,” said Mr Biyde. “That money is as safe, and you can draw on it the same, as if it were in a Post Office Savings Bank account.” It was almost impossible for dairy farmers to become custodians of the funds because of their fluctuating business, Mr Biyde said. “If we do not get an increase in price from Britain there will be little money not going into the guarahteed price,” he said. “It is taking all we get from Britain to cover costs.”

t The industry did pay into the stabilisation funds more than other industries, but if there had been no stabilisation costs would have climbed much higher. It would be inconsistent for farmers to take the ups but not -the downs, and he was satisfied that unless war broke out there would not be continuously ascending prices. Testing Time

“In the past there had been losses on the guaranteed price, and the testing time would come when again there was nothing in the kitty. The Dairy Commission would be able, if prices fell, to see that farmers did not take the whole blow. The Commission would be a great stabilising influence. “Do you agree that the ordinary dairy-farmer would give up that stabilising influence and would say: ‘We will take the lot?’ ” he asked. Delegates: No. “We have the Welfare State to-day, and even without those funds a Government would not allow the industry to sink,” Mr O’Halloran said in reply. Mr Biyde: Remember 1933?