Labour tries to halt bill restructuring; milk industry

Press, 26 July 1980, Page 2

Labour tries to halt bill restructuring; milk industry

PA Wellington i I A bill for comprehensive restructuring of the country’s milk-supply industry got :a sceptical reception from ( |the Opposition when it was introduced in Parliament yesterday. i The Milk Amendment Bill restructures the Milk Board, replacing representatives of ! bodies such as the Municipal Association and the Counties Association with industrybased members.

The bill strengthens the representation of the milk vendors, the milk stations federation, and the Dairy

Board. Introducing the bill, the Minister of Agriculture (Mr Maclntyre) said the aim was to make the board in-dustry-controlled.

The bill also abolishes the Milk Prices Authority and its functions and the fixing of shop-dairy profit margins on milk going to the Secretary of Trade and Industry. The maximum rate of levy payable to the board is increased from 0.4 c a litre to 1c a litre for milk and from 4c to 10c for cream.

Mr Maclntyre said the bill stemmed from a Government i caucus sub-committee study ■ on milk treatment and distribution. The sub-committee study was the most thorough yet undertaken-into the industry and had heard 193 submissions, he said. • The ; Under-secretary for Agriculture and chairman of the. sub-committee (Mr R. L. Talbot) said that the changes proposed by the bill, had generally been welcomed by the town milk industry. But in opposing the introduction of ,the bill, Labour members questioned the need to change a system which was already working well and asserted that the Government had had insufficient consultation with the industry. 7 . Mrs Ann Hercus (Lab., Lyttelton) said milk vendors had not been given the opportunity to comment on the bill and had not been aware that 7 the abolition of the authority was contemplated. The authority had worked satisfactorily and at a low cost since the period befote 1968 vwhen the industry was a shambles, she said, r The Government had produced no evidence that the authority was not working well . and it had clearly brought stability to the industry.

Mrs Hercus said the Commerce Commission which would set ' the new price margins. for the Secretary of Trade and Industry would meet in secret and the right to appeal would occur after the event and be extremely expensive. “The-move will return us to the shambles of the pre--1967 days,” she said. The Leader of the Opposition (Mr Rowling) said the board would take $5 million from the new levy and he asked what benefit the consumer would get from the increase.

’ But :Mr Maclntyre said that far from harming the consumer’s cause, ‘..the bill would ensure that free delivery of milk continued at a time when there was a move away from this system in the United States. The Commerce Commission would handle its new job “excellently,” the Minister said.

Mr G. W. Thompson (Nat., Horowhenua) said the increased levy would give the board money to promote milk and recoup the situation of declining consumption.

The milk prices authority was “a 7 cosy little set up” which ■ .. had worked quite. well, but it was unnecessary because much of its work was simply duplicating material already handed by the Department of Trade and Industry. MrD. C. McKinnon (Nat., Albany) said the restructuring of f-; the Milk Board would bring the industry — from the farm to the sale of milk — closer together to the benefit of the consumer. It wojild allow the industry tori have greater control of its_>owri destiny, he said: - ri : ''-7-r • ■•.•■-•

The Labour Party opposed the bill • but it was introduced on a division won by the Government, 40-31, arid referred to the Lands and Agriculture Select Committee.