Metropolitan Milk Board And Sale Of Raw Milk

Press, Volume C, Issue 29536, 10 June 1961, Page 12

Metropolitan Milk Board And Sale Of Raw Milk

The Christchurch Metropolitan Milk Board yesterday decided to seek immediate legal advice to find out whether, under its constitution, it may sell only pasteurised milk. In the meantime the board will advise vendors and treatment stations that only pasteurised milk may be sold. The board made these decisions after it received letters from the Minister of Health (Mr Shelton) and the Christchurch Medical Officer of Health (Dr. F. L. Jepson) advising the withdrawal of the special authority granted by the former Minister of Health in 1958 whereby all milk sold in Christcnurch had to be pasteurised.

Mr Shelton’s action was taken after representations had been made to him by the Milk Consumers’ Protection Society of Christchurch through the member of Parliament for St. Albans (Mr H. J. Walker). Dr. Jepson told the board meeting that the revocation of the authority prohibiting raw milk sales did not disturb any of the powers held locally in Christchurch by the board. The board could still prevent the sale for human consumption of any milk known to be affected by disease. Dr. Jepson said that the authority prohibiting raw milk sales in Christchurch had been brought in at the urging of a former Medical Officer of Health (Dr. A. Douglas), when in 1958, there was a serious risk of undulant fever from milk from diseased cows. Now the danger appeared to have passed, ar d the Minister of Health considered that the authority should be revoked. Dr. Jepson said that giving all powers on the control of the sale of milk to the milk board placed Christchurch on the same basis as other large cities. However, in every other large city there was the right to sell raw’ milk, but all milk boards refused to sell It. Opinion Sought Asked by the chairman (Mr W. E. Olds) what his opinion was on the sale of raw milk. Dr. Jepson said he was dogmatic on it. "I only have one opinion. That is. onlypasteurised milk should be sold in Christchurch." Mr G. A. Franks said the

Minister’s letter was the best news he had heard since he had been a member of the board. It would give back to the consumer the right of choice. He said that the board under its constitution had to give the consumer the right of choice between raw milk and pasteurised milk. The only way in which Dr. Jepson’s opinion could be carried out was for the board to change its by-laws. Disease in Herds Tuberculosis in Canterbury dairy cows was down to on'y } per cent. Although btrucelksis and uMutemt fever were present in hosier percentages, there were enough diseasefree herds in Canterbury to supply all the raw milk required. Mr W. P. Glue: If all milk is lumped together at the treatment stations can we guarantee disease-free milk without pasteurisation? Mr N. G. Ha’.taway: That is the danger. If we cannot guarantee disease-free milk, al! milk should be pasteurised. Mr R. G. Brown said that three yeans ago. in one herd of 200 cows on’y 30 miles from Christchurch. 98 cows were destroyed because they had tuberculosis. “By all means let us have freedom of choice, but not if it means a danger to health," he said.

Mr O’ds then moved that the board write to the vendors and treating stations telling them that even with the Minis'er's direction there would be no alteration in the type of milk sold by the board. “Ont of Order” Mir Franks: That motion is out of order. The board has to sell raw milk if it is requested. We cannot stipulate only pasteurised milk. The withdrawal of the Minister's authority restores the right of choice. Mr Brown: It Is all right to say that the cows are free from disease. But what about the dirty cow bails, rats, and diseased humans who touch the milk. Cr. Glue: If you say any more TH stop drinking milk. Mr P. J. Skelierup said that Dr. Jepson had given his opinion, and it should have some weight. If it was disregarded the board would leave itse’if wide open if any of the public were infected with disease by drinking raw milk. Mr Okfe said he based his motion on the fact that it was the board's duty to provide the public with safe and pure milk, and that overrode any consideration of the right of choice. After further discussion on the meaning of the board’s constitution the board decided to seek legal advice to clarify the position.