The Press WEDNESDAY, DECEMBER 23, 1936. Milk: A Community Service

Press, Volume LXXII, Issue 21973, 23 December 1936, Page 8

The Press WEDNESDAY, DECEMBER 23, 1936. Milk: A Community Service

The special committee set up by the Christchurch City Council to consider means of improving the milk supply in the Christchurch area has produced two very valuable reports, one a survey of the distribution problem and the other an assembly of scientific opinions as to the best method of making milk “ safe.” The need for rationalising the distribution of milk has been pressed vigorously for more than two years by vendors and dairymen, mainly on the ground that competition has become so keen that the milk business has ceased to provide a reasonable living for those engaged in it. But it is made very clear m the committee’s main report that the problem is now one which concerns the community as a whole and not merely those who have an immediate financial interest in the milk business. There are three main reasons for this. The first is that the excessively large number of vendors results in milk being distributed in unsuitable vehicles and containers. Unable to afford properly-constructed vans, many of the smaller vendors use ordinary motor-cars, in which the milk is exposed to dust and other forms of contamination. A second reason is that, with the introduction of a guaranteed price for butter-fat, there is a very real danger of a milk shortage. Under present conditions the sale of butter-fat is obviously a better proposition than the sale of raw milk, if only because the margin of profit is assured. A third reason is that the recent legislation affecting hours and wages works co the disadvantage of concerns large enough to employ labour. It is clearly undesirable to encourage the individual operator, who works long hours and is usually without the plant necessary for the hygienic handling of milk. Nevertheless, although the Christchurch City Council is fully alive to the need for drastic changes, it is wisely refusing to be hurried. It would no doubt be easy enough to devise a system which would ensure reasonable returns to producers and vendors. But, as the committee which is investigating the subject has perceived, the opportunity presents itself to accomplish something much more ambitious. The community is being asked to guarantee producers and vendors of milk a reasonable living; in return it is entitled to stipulate that it shall be provided with an abundant supply of milk which is safe for consumption. As Sir Hugh Acland has shown, there is room for a much more adequate system of inspection and supervision. Milk is both a blessing and a danger. It is an unrivalled health food and also, if produced and distributed in dirty surroundings, an unrivalled medium for distributing disease germs. The problem of consumption is no less important than the problem of making milk safe. The great majority of New Zealanders already consume too little milk; it is therefore essential that, in any control scheme the price should be kept as low as possible. If the City Council’s milk committee has not already conducted a minute investigation into the cost of producing and distributing raw milk, it should certainly do so. What should be aimed at is not a scheme which will protect existing producers and vendors but a scheme which will encourage the production and distribution of milk by the cheapest and best methods.