CRITICISM OF MEAT BOARD

Press, Volume LXXXV, Issue 25934, 14 October 1949, Page 6

CRITICISM OF MEAT BOARD

INFORMATION KEPT FROM MINISTER (New Zealand Press Association ) WELLINGTON, October 13. Methods adopted by the New Zealand Meat Producers’ Board were criticised by Government and Opposition members in the House of Representatives this evening when the report of the Agricultural and Pastoral Committee on a petition from the Alliance Freezing Company, urging the granting of a licence for a new freezing works for Southland, was discussed. The report of the committee, that it had no recommendation to make, was adopted. The Minister of Agriculture 'Mr E. L. Cullen) complained that the Meat Board refused to inform him of its reasons for refusing to recommend that a licence be granted. Mr Cullen said he felt the Meat Board should have taken him into its confidence and not made the Minister subservient to the board. The chairman of the committee, Mr G. H. O. Wilson (Government. Palmerston North) said there was a responsibility on the Meat Board to have exercised greater authority in improving conditions in Southland. Mr G. R. Herron (Opposition. Awarua) said the time had arrived when there should bo a different system of electing the Meat Board so that the board had a much closer relationship with producers. If the ward system of election were adopted there would be a much closer bond between the board and producers than there was now with the electoral college system. Overseas Interests Mr P. Kearins (Government. Waimarino) said the policy of the Meat Board, as laid down in 1936, was that it was opposed to any further extension of overseas meat interests in this country. It had not always adhered to that policy but it had to be admitted that it had often been placed in great difficulties. The committee had evidence of interlocking agreements between different works in Southland. The board had power to prevent that but had not done so. Mr Kearins said that Thomas Borthwick controlled 19.7 per cent, of ihe total Dominion kill of sheep and lamb carcases. Vesteys 21.5 per cent.. Swifts and Sims Cooper 13 per cent., the Cooperative Wholesale Society 8.3 per cent., Armour and Company 3 per cent., and Wilsons Meal, Ltd. 1.5 per cent. It was proved conclusively that when Vesteys dominated the Auckland province it paid a halfpenny a pound less than other companies in other parts of the country. Mr A. C. Baxter (Government. Raglan) said that he looked to the Meat Board. Federated Farmers, and the Government to see there was no extension of meat trusts. Seventy per cent, was too big a percentage to be subject to overseas control. The Meat Board should be modelled along the lines of the Dairy Products Marketing Commission. Mr F. Langstone 'lndependent Labour. Roskill) said there was sufficient

in me pool accounts io uuy wuv ■ seas meat interests. An effort should be made to establish the meat processing business on similar lines to the dairy industry. Mr Cullen said that undoubtedly the time would come when additional freezing works would be required in Southland. There were matters in the Meat Act that concerned the Government and the Minister of Agriculture. He had written to the Meat Board and asked why it had refused a licence for a new works so that he could tell the farmers of Southland, but the Meat Board, acting on the advice of its legal adviser, replied that it was not necessary for the Minister to be informed. His relations with the board, however. had been very good, said Mr Cullen. Nevertheless, he felt there should be closer co-operation between the Meat Board and the Government. He felt the Meat Board should have taken him into its confidence and not made the Minister subservient to the board. He felt that it was not intended the Meat Act should be interpreted in the way the board had done and that information should be withheld from the Minister. Existing works should not be starved, but where a works could not cope with the increasing cow and ewe population, which was the basis of the freezing industry, he thought a new works should be established, said Mr Cullen.

The Minister of Finance (Mr Nash) said it. was a menace for overseas companies to have a major, controlling interest in the industry because they could “tie up things at the other end.” The Government must come in if there was a monopoly. There should be loss control of Ihe industry by outside monopolies, though it was well known that outsiders should assist farmers with their skill and knowl< dge