FRUIT CONTROL

Evening Post, Volume CVIII, Issue 99, 23 October 1924, Page 5

FRUIT CONTROL

DIVISION AMONG GROWERS / ■ i ."'"■■'■

LOCAL AND EXPOBT. MABKETS.

Growers throughout the Dominion do not appear to be unanimous over the proposed control of fruit in both local and overseas trades. Some of them, said Mr. A. M'Kee to a representative of "The Post," are dreading that Parliament will pass a law in haste that orchardists will repent at leisure. "As an orchardist of twenty years standing I say with all the emphasis in my power " added Mr. M'Kee, "that this proposed control of the fruit trade is inimical to the industry. The Dairy Control and Meat Control do not touch the local trade. The Fruit Control in Queensland furnishes a deplorable example of what local fruit control means. The Queensland Government tells producers they must pay for the privilege of having a Council of Agriculture, whether' they want it or not, and the farmers and truitgrowers are sitting up rubbing their eyes m wonderment. Fruitgrowers have to pay £2000.- They cannot escape, for the money is taken from their account saies. The fruitgrowers have no freedom, but they must pay up and be pleasant. •

Ihe Queensland scheme applies to the whole State, and,if there is anything % m this brand new doctrine of control would consequently JiaVe the better chance of success; but the Nelson pro]ect is a fetish peculiar to a small section of enthusiasts in that province who are trying hard to induce Parliament to give them drastic1 powers by bare majority with which to bludgeon their fellow-growers to their way of thinking, even though the minority may produce three times more fruit than their aggressors.* No one knows better than the promoters that there is not the slightest chance of Auckland, Hawkea Bay Canterbury, or, Otago 'cottoning on to this local control project. Then where could the 'control' come in? ■KeaUy the whole thing is'ludicrous. ■ cm. 7™; ' ex P°rt> Nelson does fourhfths of the trade of the Dominion, and yet it is proposed to admit to control of that business men from all other fruit-growing districts in the Dominion, men who.would know nothing of our conditions, and yet in whose hands our fate is to be placed. ' "We do not want Government interference, especially with the example of Queensland before us. .That is undiluted Bolshevism, and the growers in that State now realise it to their sorrow and loss." Mr. M'Kee concluded: '.'The' proposed legislation will be ruinous ' for many growers who have courageously fought 'against adverse circumstances and are only now getting the better of them." •