Farmers Oppose Waitaki Bid

Press, Volume CVIII, Issue 31865, 18 December 1968, Page 1

Farmers Oppose Waitaki Bid

'The Press” Special Service

DUNEDIN, December 17. The Waitaki Farmers’ Freezing Company’s move for a merger with the Canterbury Frozen Meat Company, Ltd, could save in costs, but disadvantages would result in areas where the companies competed against eaBh other, Mr. W. Malcolm, an electoral committee delegate for 25 years, said at the monthly meeting of North Otago Federated Farmers yesterday.

Mr Malcolm said that sales in the Waimate. Oamaru and Palmerston districts could suffer because a reduction in competition would bring lower prices to farmers. While this was certainly not the purpose of the proiposed merger it could well • become one of the results of lit. As one of the original shareholders with a clear recollection of the bitterness among fanners towards the operators of 50 years ago and of events which led to the formation of the Waitaki company, he would say that good will and co-operation between the processing industry and farmers were vital to both parties.

tween farmers and processing concerns. Mr .1. Wardell agreed with Mr Malcolm's belief that if competition were reduced there would be nothing on ! which to base stock disposal j rates. ’I The federation should be .’ very strongly against the merJjger and do everything it leould to block it, he said. * Mr C. J. McLeod asked * what the alternative would be if the merger was opposed by * the federation. The C.F.M was sitting like a plum for ' someone to take over. He I wondered if the federation : should ask the Meat Board to 1 make funds available for it 'to become producer-control- ; led.

Mr Malcolm said the C.F.M. and Waitaki were both established by farmers but the majority of shares was now controlled by the investing public. I A desire to ensure a capital gain for shareholders by 1 means of rationalisation was understandable, but to whom should any cost savings go, . Mr Malcolm asked. The Meat ( and Wool Boards’ Economic) Service provided ample proof! that all was not well on Otago) and Canterbury sheep farms. | | Investors generally, and particularly the management |of New Zealand’s big investjment agencies, would be wise I to. remember that the majority of sheepfarmers had always supported freedom of ' marketing and processing. A departure from that policy would spell the end of iactive participation by .private enterprise in the conduct lof the meat industry’s affairs j Mr Malcolm said that a [clear understanding on future reductions in processing costs was essential in establishing good relationships be-