MUNICIPAL MILK.

Auckland Star, Volume LIV, Issue 213, 8 September 1923, Page 6

MUNICIPAL MILK.

SERIOUS FINANCIAL POSITION. WELLINGTON AND TAKMERS. HARD BARGAIN FOR CONSUMERS. (By Telegraph. —Special to "Star.") WELLIXOTOX, this day. The Wellington municipal milk monopoly is reaching a serious financial position as the result of recent negotiation, with supplying f armerß will <au«e the consumers to pay £ 10,000 extra per annum. The position is SO acute that the Mayor talks of reverting to the astern of open competition, when it is hoped that municipal methods with pasteurised bottled milk will score against private vendors. The arbitration award covering the wholesale price of milk for the coming year was considered by the City Council which also decided the question ot what charge should be made to consumer* during the coming summer period. It was finally decided that the charge should be at the rate of 7d per quart retail from the Ist October to the 31st of March, the price of cream to I remain as at present. The charge made j Inst summer was sid per quart, so that the increase for the coming summer ia considerable—lid per quart. The summer price for cream last year was l/o a pint: this summer it will remain at the 1023 winter price of 2/2 a pint, at\ increase of Sd a pint on last suJimor c price. DISADVANTAGE OF MOXOFOtY. Commenting upon the new price scale made necessary by the increased prices to be paid to suppliers, the Mayor (Mr. R A. Wright) states: "At the present time the City Council, as everybody knows, has practically a monopoly of the milk supply to consumers, an exception being the nearby farmers, who are free to retail their milk in the city, and the result of that practical monopoly is to exclude the general body of suppliers from selling their milk in the city. A monopoly has its advantages in many ways. It makes for cheapening of the" cost of distribution, but if, of course, the price to be paid by the council to suppliers is to be increased abnormally, the question arises whether we are not paying too much for the monopoly. The council will have to consider seriously the question of abandoning the monopoly, and buying wherever it chooses in the cheapest market. This would result in a renewal of competition, because those suppliers, who were unable to sell their milk to the city as at present, would naturally want to sell in town. The effect of this would be that the City Council would undoubtedly lose some of its clients, but I am of the opinion that, by selling the article tinder the bottle system, ire would compete successfully against competition. NO OTHER ALTERNATIVE. "I regret to say this, but I can ccc no other alternative. We are now called upon to pay £15,000 more for our milk for this year than we did for last year's supplies, and we were already paying considerably in excess of what was being paid to the suppliers of other centres. If, however, the council gives up its monopoly and allows everyone to trade it will relieve us from a very great deal of trouble and anxiety, and, even though the volume of our business would probably be reduced somewhat, I believe that in the end it would be for the best." TOO HARD A BARGAIN , . Commenting on this situation and the Mayor's suggested solution, the "Wellington Post" declares that the fanners appear to have regarded the council as a wealthy, commercial monopolist. They have overlooked the fact that the council acts for thousands of consumers, many of them being poor. Those consumers also control the council, and, while they have hitherto accepted increased prices without murmuring, they are unlikely to continue to do so. If they believe that farmers are taking advantage of council control to squeeze at every turn, they will be much inclined to throw overboard the whole milk scheme. It would be a calamity if this were to happen, and farmers, as well as consumers, would suffer. Farmers should remember this, and consider whether they are demanding too much, and driving" too hard a bargain with a patient, consuming public.