MILK SUPPLY

Evening Post, Volume CIII, Issue 63, 17 March 1922, Page 4

MILK SUPPLY

IMPORTANT PROPOSALS

RECOMMENDED TO COUNCIL

DELIVERY IN BOTTLES,

An important step in the municipalisation of the milk supply of Wellington was recommended to the '. City Council last night by the Milk Committee. The committee asked that it should be granted the necessary authority to proceed with the delivery of milk in bottles as from the date of expiry of the vendors' contract, viz., Bth July, 1922, utilising the present depot at Dixon-street for such' purpose. The estimated cost of providing the necessary plant and equipment and structural alterations to premises was £21,600, made up as under :-r- ---£• Bottles 3,353 Caps ..:' 834 dates 2,379 Filling and capping machines ... 1,616 Bottle-washing machine 2,254 Coupons 1,035 Wrappers 95 Counting and sorting machines ... 334 £12,600 Horses 2,500 Vehicles 3,500 £6000 Structural alterations to buildings 3,000 £21,600 COST OF DISTRIBUTION. Councillor C. B. Norwood, chairman of the Milk Committee, said that the request made by his committee was.perhaps the most important that had ever teen made to the council. There was nothing new in the report, which simply crystallised earlier decisions of the council. The contracts with the vendors would expire on Bth July, and serious financial loss and inconvenience to the public might bo caused if the report were not adopted immediately. The proposals of the committee-had been framed as the result of the views expressed by an American doctor who visited Wellington some time ago, and who said that the conditions existing, here would not be tolerated in the. United States. There was. overwhelming evidence that the most satisfactory method of distributing milk was by the bottle system. It was known that finance was a very difficult matter. The Milk Committee would much prefer to have developed the scheme fully with the erection of a new station, but that Would have entailed the expenditure of much money and would have necessitated an appeal to the ratepayers. The committee was of opinion that it could carry on for'five years in the present station. All the money that had been borrowed to start the milk scheme was £52,000. On the 23rd of March, after all accounts had been paid, there would be a credit balance at the bank of £21,500, so that only £30,500 was represented in any certain form of fixed assets. It had been elated that the reason no tenders were received for the distribution of milk was the exacting nature'-of the specifications. Whether that was so or not he could not say, but he felt that there had been some concerted action on the part of the vendors. , /Perhaps that had more to do with the fact that there were no tenders than the nature of the specifications. In any caae the council, in his opinion, had no option but to go on with the distribution of milk itself. n Careful estiI mates indicated that the maximum cost !of distribution ' would be 4d or 4jd per ! gallon. Even if the bottle system coat I n little more than the present system, the I difference in cost would be on insurance ! sd far as the health of the community was concerned. The council could not do better work than perfect what.it had already done in regard to the mUnicipalisation of the milk supply.

C9uneiUor T. Forsyth criticised the report of the Milk Department's manager on his trip to America ns being nothing more than mere generalitiss. He wanted | to know, for instance, from where it was intended to .set the bottles. Councillor Norwood : "From America." In answer to -■ Councillot Forsvth. Councillor Norwood said that the Milk Committee had not adopted- all of the ; recommendations of the milk manager. i Hp wanted to mo-Ire it clear that the balance which would he in thff bank on 23rd March was a cash balance and not a fredifc balance as he had previously indicated. <o MORE INFORMATION WANTED. Councillor Forsyth could not see how the recommendations of tiie committee ! could be carried out without a loan being, raised. Without' furthei ;jiformatior any decision of the council on the matter should be deferred. He moved that the clause be referred back for further consideration. REPORT CRITICISED. Councillor J. Burns seconded the amendment for the reason which had led him to oppose the original report. According to the manager's report, no municipality in America undertook the distribution of the milk, which was left to private enterprise. He criticised the manager's report for the Jack of information respecting health improvement from pasteurisatior of milk. The loss from breakages of bottles would be greater on Dr. ArgylcY, figures than estimated by tho committee. There had been too much rush and bustle about the whole matter. The prices quoted for machinery were extraordinary. Half of £2251 would be a fair price for a bottle-wash-ing machine. Before they went, on with the scheme they should decide on a permanent location for the milk station, as it had been stated that the present site was not economical. He was very cony that, they had not icade inquiries ol British people before considering buying machinery from America. He was opposed to the whole scheme, .'J-id he did not think the people wanted a municipal milk scheme. The people were going to pay 100 pel* cent, mori for their milk than tho council paid for. it. Councillor eraser: "What aye they paying now?" Councillor Bums: "Nothing like that." He -did not think th.it, so far as the hygienic side wes cor-cerned, so much risk waa being run at present as some people imagined. "VENDORS HAVE NOT PLAYED THE GAME." Councillor C. H. Chapman remarked fciisfc now that the vondors' time was drawing to a sloss they were doing all they could to oppose the scheme. The fact that Councillor Burns had admitted, the milk to be pure when it left the milk station, took away 75 per cent, from the value of his remarks in opposition to the Milk Committee's recommendation. T'l2 vendors sad :iot "played the game," and the time was over ripe when the council should lnke over the v.'holo distribution of the milk. Hr-s .suggested (.hat (,je vendors', employees should be employed by the council When it took ovct- the distribution. Although the ver.dors mcl not done their.duty, '.here could be no coubt that . there were many of their employees v.-ho would yssiat. tho council. Councillor L. 8. M'Kenzie -considered

that the council had no option but to go on with the scheme c.a proposed by the committee, li" they did not do that they would hnv.e to throw themselves back on the vendors.

Councillor .Norwood; f'And pay n big price." Continuing, Councillor M.'Ken;",ie sr.id that the only difficulty that fnceu Iho committee was money, but with good management he felt sure that they would bo able to finance the scheme. COMMITTED TO IT. Tho Mayor (Mr. R. A. Wright) said he quite agreed that it would bo bettor if they allowed, private enterprise . io carry on, because municipal distribution would bo an embr.rrassinent, bur they ■mur.t remember fiat the council was; eorr.pci.led to-enter tbe business because the milk supplier? were not satisfied with the work of the vendors. Looking back he did not see that they could have done bettsr. They were committed to tbo genome now and should not ownp horses in mid-stream. Dr. Argyle, who was -undoubtedly ;:n expert, said that if a bottle distribution wore adopted their system would be na nof.r perfect as it was possible to get it.

Councillor Forsyth : "Do you consider the scheme can be financed ou*- of revenue ?"

T.'ia Mayor : "I consider it doubtful, but if aoi we must got a loan." Councillor B. G. H. Burn'said he \yj3 in r« position io zeij teat there had been no concerted action by t'ae vendors to leave the City Council in the lurch, as had been stated ; that was only a bogey. One or two members of the committee had thought they should call the.vendors together to ask them to carry on for a little longer so as to give further time ! for consideration of plans. | Councillor Frasei said some of the vendors, at any. rate, agreed among them-, selves not to tender. The manager had brought back a great deal more information than he had been able to embody in his report. Councillor J. Burns explained that hfc did not advocate scrapping the present scheme. He was in favour of pasteurisation. MINIMUM OF EXPENDITURE. In reply, , Councillor Norwood eaid that a certain amount of working capital waf necessary. They had enough, in reserve last year to cover the machinery, and all the estimates of , the past had' been well covered. Councillors could be assured that the expenditure would ■ be kept down to the minimum. There had been managerial errors, but it was' not, bad policy that had.led to those mistakes. The committee could gst' the amount required for distribution on overdraft, so there was no need to' worry ovar the financial aspect of the scheme. By paying a little more for a. certain typo of crate it would b© possible to save money on bottles. Councillor Noryyood described the kind of oiafce which 'it was proposed to introduce. Complaint had been made that.the committee proposed to buy American instead of British machines, but •■ Councillor Norwood pointed out that a London' expert had recommended ths purchase oi bottling plant from America. The bottles made in America- wore also stronger and could stand a greater pressure than certain bottles made in- Australia; so the council would be justified • vi' procuring ,/lmeric'an bottles. The. cost of the' A.tnerican bottles landed in Wellington would be cheaper than English bottles. Councillor Norwood desired to say that all the 1" vendors had- not treated the council badly, and the conduct of some had been exemplary. :' v > . The amendment that the:'-;clause be referred back was defeated/by votes to 2. Councillors Forsyth'<and Burns asked that their protest- against iho .clause be recorded. ".',■;■■■/,:

■■ The recommendatioiKof-tfae committee ■was adopted. • • .;/'' \« i ■ TO TOT EDITOR. , Sir, —Friend!}''criticism is healthy, and the report of Dr. Argyle, which appeared in jour columns two evenings ago, should stimulate the City Council's Milk Committee- into making • what further improvements are 6ti.1l possible in its operations. What particularly struck me-was the reference to the cw> 'dition of oomo of the farms from which the milk is drawn for consumpt-'on n the city. During my visita to the country I have often been struck by the great variatiou in the condition oi cleanlir.eEa and otherwise of iome of the farms I have visited, rnoro especially those supplying the'city. Some farmers arc wot,l;---ing with the most crudely conceived buildings ?.nd equipment, and apparently aro too mean to spend a penny_ on improvements when there is no inducement. On the other hand, aorao favirers have consciences, and premises and plant installed at considerable expense, -.'lnch are up-to-date and ihoroagbly hygienic. For this outlay they receive no monetary consideration above that givan to tho farmer with inefScienj equipment. In Mr. Norwood's defence of fcho Oity, Council's scheme he midm ih.°.■ Rta~eire*.*.t' that they were "abb to put thcirf.iifpr on tho larmer who is not doing justfoe to the supply." If sue": ba the case, would it not be fair to <aalM a ctandard o? purity, and pay the iviio? whone .milk reaches that standard, or over, a highe-.1 price than the. scheduled rate? Further, in vifsv; of fcba imoort'mcc nlaced op the necessity of feeding infants with the' purest of milk, I wonld suggest that certain farmers who show a record of high quality milk, should be .Selected, their premises inspected periodically, iheir cars sealed, E~d iheir milk kept separate at the depot, arid supplied specially -toy •:ufan i!6 vse, and charged for at a higher ra':*.. 'vTKk cnuld be simply arranged in view of the advent of the bottle system, and would, I am sure, be w-slcow.ed by irsr.r.y, if aofc all mothers.—l am, etc., CONSUMER, •■ 15th March. 10 TKS EDITOR. Sir,—Wo have shortly io ssy in answer' to Councillor Norwood's a;tempted aspevaior. on the vendors that pot only have they not opposed tendering either ■; individually \oi" cniwrertedly, but all they have decided wpoa as yet is to carry on until the council, by actual overt action, prevent there. This coarse ■has beer, decided upon because they he\ thai whatever mistakes. Uie council makes, or disabilities it puis upon the public, the public mind will cot relieve the vendorr of a share in the onus .short of their carrying en to ths lieitvnata iaci moment. In proof of which , tee appended the following signatures :— • HENRY BODLEY, . Thc...No,-l Municipal Milk Distributing Company .Ltd. CHARLES J. DUFFY, /. Managing Director' Welling/ ton Milk Vendors' Associa- • ' ' tion, Ltd.' . . ■S.G, COLE, • ""'..:■ City Milk Supply, Ltd. g-oeeie'and maker, • \ Tasman-sf-reet. 17th March, 1922. "/. '

Mr. Robert Mercer, who has been associnted- wif.ii elector^! matter's foi a longthy period of years, has received .intimation thut ha has be-3i) retired from Iks position of registrar of electors and I'Rtui'iiing officer for Dunedin .South, -aj from 31st March. The pepnrtroapt' expresses high appreciation of ths valuable :-.e:-vice;i r«i<dei'ed hy Mr. Moi'CK 1, My. Mercer has occupied 1 the positions.stated for a-.period '.-■(■ t-.venty yti\n>.