DAIRY POOL

Dominion, Volume 15, Issue 234, 29 June 1922, Page 5

DAIRY POOL

Sir,—As I have taken a keen interest in the subject of co-operative marketing from its inception, I need not apologise for again seeking the publicity of'your columns as a paper widely read by producers, in order to

emphasise the fact that through sectional differences and jealousies, my fellow farmers are losing a golden opportunity to take control of the most important end of their business. I will deal briefly with the two proposals before the industry, the first, or North Island one, appears to me to be a species of hybred, part private company and part national scheme. Again their board of control is too unweildly and unnecessarily large, due I fear to local jealousies, each district desiring representation. I would point out that no government will enact legislation, either giving financial aid (through the. levy) or compulsory powers to a private concern. The three essentials for success are: compulsion, finance, and grading. . .The second, or South Island proposal, “To hold monthly sales in the Dominion,” seems to me to be increasing the present evil co-operative marketing is designed to cure. What reliable data have the board out here to guide them in fixing prices. . “The butter ring at home would simply manipulate our local market. Now, as to that bugbear of most, suppliers, financing the exporters through the pool. Producers seer., to have lost sight of the fact that the pool board takes the place of the presentrday exporter, and will draw against shipments exactly on the same lines as the individual exporter works on to-day, with one important exception. The pool board has. the credit of the whole of the Dominion dairy industry behind it. Dealing with loss of individuality' I expect the same argument was used by every farmer’s wife when the first co-operative dairy factory was started. Under the grading system, providing the same quality is there, the smallest factory gets exactly the same price under the pool as the largest concern. What I proposed at the Farmers’ Union Conference last July, and which that conference endorsed, was a scheme based on the Danish system, already proved practical and successful. A board' of control in the Dominion, consisting of five, and not more than seven members, nominated .by the Dairy Associations and Farmers’ Union (the latter has a large number of dairymen amongst its members), with one Government npminee. That board to appoint a small executive of three in London to act as fheir selling agents, the three to be the best brains procurable in . the dairy trade nt Home. Niggardliness in paying either board or executive will be fatal to good service; get the best mon and pay liberally. As to financing the working of the pool organisation, I would suggest a poundage rate on all dairy produce exported ; a mere fraction of a penny per lb.’ would be sufficient, and will not bo felt by the producer. . The most important link in the chain between producer and consumer is shipping. A remit dealing with a national shipping line will be discussed at the Dominion conference in-July. Briefly the scheme is a Government loan for shipping, raised on behalf oT Hie three main primary industries, wool, meat and dairying, who guarantee interest and sinking fund, provided through the special levy on all produce shipped, each Of the above ininterests to nominate two members of the shipping board with one Government nominee. That board would hold the line in trust for the primary producers for all time, no shares to bo issued or dividends paid, after working expenses and depreciation are met, all profits to be used in improving stpr- ■ facilities, both cool and otherwise, at Home and in the Dominion, reducing freights, and finally the special levy. All exportable products to be shipped by the line. „ Co-operative marketing and shipping are so interdependent the producer must control both. Finally, I would suggest, that the Minister of Agriculture be asked to call a conference of delegates' from every co-operative and proprietary factory in the Dominion, to reconsider the pool question, and let the suppliers decide the matter for themselves. There are 35,643 dairy suppliers in this Dominion, and it is a sound principle that those “who pay the piper should call the tune.” In conclusion, I would appeal to my fellow farmers to look at this . question from a national, and not a parochial point of view. Ask themselves if the present system of marketing is satisfactory to the producers, and if not, whether a system based on practical experience (the Danish) is not worth trying. . In any case it Is most unfair and undemocratic for a small minority (the South represents one seventh of the industry) to hold up such a necessary and long overdue reform.—l am, etc., QRIMSDALE ANDERSON, Pelorus Sound; June 17, 1922.