Freezing-company costs wanted by farmers

Press, 17 March 1977, Page 2

Freezing-company costs wanted by farmers

The Dominion executive of Federated Farmers will be asked to seek access, through the Meat Board, to freezing company costs, the North Canterbury meat and wool section executive decided yesterday. The executive said it wanted the right to information on freezing company “charges, costs, and by-prod-uct returns,” in order to prepare objections to future increases in killing charges. The chairman (Mr M. R. Barnett) said that such charges were fixed by the Ministry of Agriculture. Even the Meat Board did not have access to such details of freezin g-company finances. The situation was amplified by a member of the Meat Board (Mr J. C. Daniell) later in the meeting. He said that it was only in 1972, “after 50 years,” that the board gained the power to participate in the setting of killing charges. Two years later, however, legislative changes removed the requirement for Ministerial approval of increases.

This meant that the Minister no longer needed Meat Board recommendations on applications for increases, and the board lost the right to certain background information.

Now the responsibility was put on the companies themselves, to observe “reasonable” standards in price setting, with approval by Ministry staff. He assured Mr Barnett that if the board had the power to obtain freezing-company cost figures, he would act as the farmer’s representative where charge increases were being investigated.

A member of the executive said he thought it would be in the Government’s interest to ensure access to any information which might help curb inflation by minimising price increases.

“Particularly where the person who pays the bill doesn’t have any say in setting the rate,” he said. Mr Barnett emphasised that the executive was not suggesting that freezing

companies should not make a profit, “but rather that they should be efficient in making a profit." Discussion followed about whether those companies used by the Ministry as the criteria for setting charges included a fair representation of both efficient and inefficient companies. Earlier, Mr Barnett protested against the existing industrial situation, saying it made circumstances “untenable” for farmers. “Until it becomes better, there is little hope for any real progress in the farming industry, especially with costs as high as they are,” he said. In few cases were workers observing the recently legislated requirement for threeday notification of industrial action.

Unions simply refused to give prior notice of strikes, he said, and stock in the yards had to be returned to the farms.

“I hope a firm decision will result; the legislation is there, and something has to be done,” Mr Barnett said.