DAIRY PRODUCE CONTROL

Dominion, Volume 20, Issue 28, 28 October 1926, Page 4

DAIRY PRODUCE CONTROL

IS ITS POLICY SOUND?

FARMERS 'HOLD VARYING

VIEW'S

Whether any attempt at price-fixing of New Zealand butter on the Loudon market was justified or not was a subject which led to some diversity of opinion at the meeting of the Dominion Executive of the New Zealand Farmers’ Union yesterday. The president of the union (Mr. W. J. Polson) contended that the Dairy Produce Control Board had done considerable harm in London by brandishing the big stick, and had only itself to blame for a good deal of the opposition it was at present meeting. The majority of delegatee, however, held that the settingrup of the board had been the salvation of the industry in the Dominion, and a resolution was passed expressing approval of the valuable work the board had done and was doing in the interests of New Zealand dairyfarniers, Mr. J. H. Joll Havelock North) said that if the control of dairy produce had not been undertaken when it was, the dairy industry to-day would have been in a rotten position indeed. He felt sure that if it had not been for the action of the Dairy Produce Control Board, New Zealand farmers to-day would be getting about 4d. a lb. on the London market, instead pf the Is. 4jd. they were receiving. Mr. C. C. Munro (Auckland) said that the New Zealand Farmers’ Union had supported the Dairy Control Board in the work it had done in the past, and, in view of the bashing about theDairy Board was at present receiving, the union should stand to its guns now, and let the public know that they were solidly behind the board. A 10l of farmers, in ignorance of the true position, were writing to the papers, and these letters were being given & great deal more prominence than they deserved.

Mr. J. D. Hall (Canterbury) moved that the New Zealand Farmers' Unior express its appreciation of the work the New Zealand Dairy Produce Control Board had done in the interests of the dairying industry. The president (Mr. W. J. Polson) said,he would like to know the true position. The board itself was responsible for a great deal of the opposition it was at present receiving. The board had waved the big stick at Home, and had been responsible for making the dairy products of Australia and other countries more popular on the London market. No one knew at present the policy of the Dairy Board with regard to price-fixing. They knew that two members had been recently elected to the board who,were opposed to absolute control, and they were told that a complete change in the board’s policy was possible. ~ , Captain Colbeck (Auckland) said he was verv sorry indeed to hear the remarks which had been/uttered by the president. "You are the father of dairv control,” said Captain Colbeck, “and when tlie board is sick, instead of helping it, you are doing your best to kil] it.” Ther ewas no doubt, be said, that the people who were squealing loudest were the speculators. Mr. O. P. Lynch (Paekakariku strongly supported Mr. Hall’s motion. He said the farmers had been sohdlv behind control of dairy produce, and thev saw no reason to withdraw that support. He seconded Mr. Hall’s mor tion. ... -a Mr. K. D. Dalrvmple (Bulls) said that it was little use making bullets for the enemy to fire back. Lovalty to the principles of the Farmers’ Union was the only thing which would « ee P it going. . , ... Mr. Hall’s motion was carried, with several dissentients.