MILK FOR TOWNS

Evening Post, Volume CXVIII, Issue 95, 19 October 1934, Page 12

MILK FOR TOWNS

IMPROVEMENTS URGED

AUCKLAND SCHEME

The general problem of distributing milk in the urban areas of the Dominion was discussed in the House of Representatives today when the Local Bills Committee recommended that legislation initiated in Hastings, Napier, and Timaru for the control of milk distribution in those centres, on lines similar to the Auckland scheme, should not be allowed to proceed during the present session. It was agreed on both sides of the House that there was urgent need for improved methods of milk distribution in tho cities and towns, but at tho samo time it was felt that the Auckland method was still in the experimental stage and not yet suitable for adoption., Mr. H. T. Armstrong (Labour, Christchurch East) expressed tho opinion that Parliament should grapple with the problem of supplying milk to the urban areas this session, not only in the towns which had asked for legislation, but throughout the Dominion. This viewpoint was supported by Mr. A. E. Ansell (Government, Chalmers), who said that the fair thing should be done to both producers and consumers. There had. been antagonism to the legislation from some of the local bodies on the ground that it might result in raising the price of milk, but it was not necessary that that result should be brought about. The whole problem should be investigated by the Government and a comprehensive scheme should be initiated. Mir. W. A. Veitch (Independent, Wanganui) said he was convinced that a case had been made out for an. investigation by the Government in an effort to provide some machinery whereby milk could be supplied efficiently to the centres of population. The three Bills which had been introduced were on the lines of the Auckland legislation, and illustrated tho desire of different localities to improve their milk supply. The Local Bills Committee had done the right thing, as the problem was one for general legislation. DISMAL PAILUKE. Mr. A. Harris (Government, Waitemata) said that the Local Bills Committee had shown wisdom in recommending that the legislation be not allowed to proceed. The experiment in Auckland had been a disastrous one, and he would shudder to think that it should be made in other parts of New Zealand. There had been no more dismal failure than the Auckland Metropolitan Milk Board, and it was to be hoped that the Auckland Act would be speedily repealed, as it had been an outstanding and deplorable disaster. He could not find anyone outside those interested who would support the Auckland board.. . The Minister of Finance (the at. Hon. J. G. Coates): Has the Auckland Act any international significance? (Laughter.) ' "It may have," Mr. Harris replied. "If the people overseas consider that the people of the Dominion have the mental capacity for passing such legislation ana keep it on the Statute Book, .there might be serious repercussions. ■ Ho said that the people of Auckland were praying night and morning for the repeal of the legislation. f The Leader of the Opposition (Mr. M. J. Savage) said he was not sure that there would be international complications, but if the Auckland Bill involved tho citizens of Auckland in I praying night and morning it was a step in, the. right direction. He was not prepared 'to; say;that the Auckland Act was.a failure, but admitted frankly that it had not been handled as well as it might liave been. The whole problem was to see that the milk produced was made available to the It was no use producing anything unless it was available for consumption. The farmers had a right to expect a reasonable price for their produce, and at the same time the consumers also had rights. ■ Mr. E. A. Wright (Independent, Wellington Subur.bs) said that the milk supply in Wellington had been so bad that the City Council had been driven to inaugurate the scheme now in operation, and the people of Wellington would not dream of going back to the old conditions. The price for milk was fixed by arbitration, and the adjacent farmers were better off than those of any other part of the Dominion. . Mr. A. E. Jull (Government, Waipawa), the chairman of the Local Bills Committee, -which., had brought down the report, said that the Committee realised there was a general desire for improved milk distribution in the urban areas. At the same time it was felt that the Auckland experiment had not been going long enough to enable any definite views to be expressed as to whether it was a success or a failure. He thought the matter might be the subject of an investigation by the Government. PROBLEM STILIi AHEAD. Mr. W. E. Barnard (Labour, Napier) said that one could not take exception to the findings of the Committee, but at the same time the problem of milk distribution had still to be dealt with. Tho Napier Bill had been opposed by the Borough Council, and that had added to the difficulties of the position. In Napier the people were paying from 8d to 2s a gallon for their milk. The milk which was retailed at 8d a 'gallon was declared to be perfectly wholesome,, but such.a price could not give the producer a payable return. It was obvious, on the 'other hand, that if as the result of the- operations of a. milk board the price was raised it would detrimentally affect a large number of people whose incomes were woefully insufficient for their domestic needs. There was insufficient milk consumed in the Dominion. It was estimated that the average consumption per capita was half a pint per clay, whereas medical authorities contended that children should have at least one pint and a half and adults ono pint daily. He urged that the Government should deal with the problem of the distribution of milk in the urban areas at the same time as it dealt with the dairy industry generally. Personally, he thought that the Wellington scheme stood out as a shining example of what could bo done. The reports were tabled.