PASTEURISED MILK

Press, Volume LXXXVIII, Issue 26832, 10 September 1952, Page 5

PASTEURISED MILK

Sir, —As a great one for my milk and milk puddings It is very annoying to have to tell my milkman that I intend using tinned milk until a satisfactory supply can be We were getting good flavoured milk of high quality till August 31. After that the flavour and quality slumped. Some flour and water mixed would taste better. It did not taste like milk and had a faintly bad smell. This stuff was labelled “raw” milk, but I think it was pasteurised or mixed. There appears to be a ray of hope in getting goats’ milk. The present Government promised us private enterprise. The sooner the vendor can collect milk from the farm the better. This dictatorial control by big companies is the very thing that plays into the militant Communists’ handsIs this the “freedom” we defended and are being asked to defend?— Yours, etc., 1940-45. September 19, 1952.

Sir, —Would the representatives oi the four privately-owned companies holding the monopoly of the supply of milk in Christchurch publicly comment on these assertions? Has the fact that it is more profitable for the milk companies, by way of subsidies, to pasteurise milk got any bearing on the pasteurise milk got any bearing on the proposed increased supply of pasteurised milk? Is it a fact that the shareholders of these private companies will benefit directly by the introduction of increased pasteurised milk supplies? If neither of these assertions is correct would the representatives give an approximate estimate of the increased revenue, if any, that will accrue to the companies directly as a result of the proposed measure?— Yours, etc., G.J.W. August 27, 1952. [This letter was referred to the chairman of the Christchurch Milk Company (Mr W. P. Warner), who commented as follows: “The margin for pasteurisation is Id a gallon. For this service the necessary machinery cost us about £15,000. The time taken is considerable and the price paid does not represent all profit. Apart from the safety of the public health—a factor which ‘G.J.W.’ apparently discounts—the position is that large cities require vast quantities of milk from long distances, with consequent bulking, and pasteurisation becomes a practical necessity to safeguard the health of the community. As far as the Christchurch Milk Company is concerned, no dividends have accrued to the shareholders.”]

Sir, —One of your correspondents has asked the provocative question which side of the “iron curtain” are we on? It may be of interest if the answer is put in this way. Some years ago we sold ourselves a pup which was called welfare State. He is a corker pup, but like a lot of ducks, we have followed him past successive “iron curtains,” marked liberty, up the pipe. Now we are in the net at the end, quacking loudly about this pasteurised milk proposition, foisted on us by sdme of our “barbarians.” So we have been led into slavery by the antics of a pup. Trapped as easy as that. What a lot of mutts—l beg your pardonslaves we are. This. will, rock —even you.—Yours, etc., MILKMON. September 6, 1952.