Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

Meat Board criticised

Astronomical rises in costs in the meat industry in recent years are evidence that the Meat Board has not looked after the political interests of farmers but instead has looked after the interests of the taxpayers, Government and meat companies.

This is the view of Mr David Bell, of Rakaia, a member of the Sheep and Cattlemen’s Association, who has written a reply to a leader article in “The Press” on March 1 which commented on the debt in the Meat Industry Stabilisation Account of $340 million.

The editorial concluded? “The board cannot forget that too great a call on taxpayers’ support will in-

crease pressure on the Government to look after the taxpayers’ investment through a system, perhaps a State corporation, that is responsible first to the taxpayers, not the producers." Mr Bell said that such accountability to the taxpayer was the failure in the system and not the possible cure.

Supplementary minimum prices had been set at levels to cover the cost of wages and company profits. Now the Meat Board, without the blessing of the sheep fanner, he claimed, was trying to sell meat on world markets at these levels.

“The Meat Board, and in fact producer boards gener-

ally, have failed in their duty to influence politics to keep farming viable, and therefore in turn to keep the national economy viable,” said Mr Bell. “Instead the boards and the M.A.F. have contrived to keep a two-tier Government viable — a central government of unsackable public servants and an elected Government.

“We do not have a marketing problem, unless the Meat Board has created it, but we do have an internal cost problem which is pricing our products off the world markets.”

He cited rises of 1400 per cent in industrial costs, including wages, since the mid 19605, compared with

rises of only 300 per cent in returns to farmers, with S.M.P.S.

“But incredibly the Meat

Board has now seen fit to do the job of the industry and run us further into debt in the process,” said Mr Bell.

Farmers had accepted a freeze on returns during the last 18 months.

“But the meat industry companies have made off with large profits and the producer boards are building empires with our money.

“Now the danger is a drop in supply of meat and wool and further failures throughout supporting industries,” said Mr Bell.

This article text was automatically generated and may include errors. View the full page to see article in its original form.
Permanent link to this item

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/CHP19840309.2.106.14

Bibliographic details

Press, 9 March 1984, Page 22

Word Count
399

Meat Board criticised Press, 9 March 1984, Page 22

Meat Board criticised Press, 9 March 1984, Page 22