FREE MARKETING

Evening Star, Issue 19520, 30 March 1927, Page 4

FREE MARKETING

DAIRY PRODUCERS MEET

PRICE-FIXING POLICY DENOUNCED

[.Per United Press 4ssocution.]

PALMERSTON N., March 29. An important conference of dairy company delegates, arising, put of a meeting held recently at Hamilton, assembled at Palmerston North this morning. approximately 200 being present, i The object of tno conference was to secure an expression of opinion upon ! the policy of the Control Board, past, present, and future. Mr J. A. Nash, M.P., was elected chairman, and expressed pleasure at the presence of Mr Timpany, a member of the Control Board, who was present in a private capacity to learn something more of the feeling of the producers towards control, thus possibly strengthening his hands as a board member in opposing the operation of compulsory clauses. • Mr Timpany would not address the meeting. Mr Sinclair urged that the Control Board be requested at the meeting tomorrow to consider the abolition of all I tho compulsory clauses, and the wisdom of going more on tho lines of the Australian Board. Mr Gibson (Rihotu) moved that tho ■ conference was of the opinion that the ' existence of a Dairy Produce Board was necessary in order to adequately organIso and arrange shipments of produce to secure the most favorable shipping freights and insurance rates, to advertise fully and systematically tho country’s dairy produce, to enlarge existing markets, to establish new mar- | nets, and in other directions to estabI ijsh our industry on a more efficient basis.

The motion was carried, j “ That the conference believed that the first essential in the marketing of the dominion’s produce was the mam- . tenance of confidence and goodwill in our chief market, and that the extreme policy followed by the Dairy Produce Board was directly responsible for the loss of goodwill, also for the heavy I financial loss now facing the in- ! dustry,” was a resolution moved by Mr Hine (Tekorangi). When conference resumed after lunch the Chairman announced that 248 delegates were present, representing 112 factories, with an annual output of 24,060 tons of butter and 22,613 tons of cheese. Considerable discussion followed the motion by Mr Hine. He stated that goodwill was an asset of great material value, and many years had been spent in building up that good feeling with the merchants at Home. It was absurd to think that that conference could do nothing constructive. The delegates comprised men whose hearts were in the industry to which they devoted their lives. He did not wish to see the board abolished, but the name and policy should be changed. The board in its arrogance had attempted to do a thing which the Germans could not do with all their U-boats—namely, starve out John Bull, so that he would be forced to buy New Zealand butter (Applause.) Mr J. Chrystall (Shannon Dairy Company) thought the abolition of price fixing would deliver the producers into the hands of trusts. He was absolutely surprised to hear the delegates state that price-fixing was disastrous. (Uproar and laughter.) He quoted figures showing that for the cheese that had been sold from October to March 14, when price-fixing was abolished, the average price was 91s lOkl, whereas since March it had averaged 76s Tjd. The difference in favor of fixed prices was 2os Bijd. The same applied to butter, which showed a balance of 18s 7d per cwt in favor of controlled prices. He considered that it was not John Bull objecting, but those profiteering from the industry. (Applause from the control supporters.) The Chairman replied to Mr Chrystal! by quoting a cablegram from Mr lorns, who stated that substantial progress was now being made in regard to the goodwill of a largo section of the trade which for three months had been excluded from participating. Also Mr lorns was of the opinion that a continuation of fixed prices would spell disaster for the industry. The motion was carried, several voting against it.

Mr A. J. Sinclair (Te Awamutu) moved—“ That this conference reaffirms the protests previously made against the enforcement of the compulsory provisions of the Act, and denies the right of any body of men to take possession of our property by force in order to embark on a hazardous venture, which has no precedent in any part of the world: and, further, that Parliament be called upon to repeal tho compulsory provisions of the Act.”

“ This is whore the fight starts, gentlemen,” added Mr Sinclair, amidst laughter. He stated that the promise had been previously made that the compulsory clauses would only be used in case of emergency. The late Mr Massay and also the Hon. W. Nos worthy had riven similar assurances. Consequently the enforcing of the compulsory clauses had been a distinct breach of faith with the farmers.

Mr P. J. Small (Palmerston North) doubted*if the conference fully represented the farming interests of the dominion. It seemed to him more a

gatl# ring_ of free marketing enthusiasts, ■whose object was to clip the wings of the Control Board so that it would not be of any use to the dominion at all. He considered that the majority of farmers were absolutely in favor of control. (Cries of “No ” and dissension.) Some speakers had said a great denl_ about the dissatisfaction of the British people, but were they consumers or Tooley street? (Applause from control supporters.) Mr Small urged careful action lest the board’s machinery be damaged. He preferred the present position to selling under Rafferty rules. Mr Hine, replying to Mr Small, facetiously contrasted the board’s organised methods of marketing with the Rafferty rules of earlier days. “Then,” he said, “wo got a decent price for our butter; now only a miserable shilling.” (Laughter and applause.) The motion was carried—Bl voting for it and 10 against. Messrs Sinclair, Gibson, Murdock, Rundlc, and Leoson were then appointed to place the views of the conference before the Control Board tomorrow. They will form a deputation to the Prime Minister and Minister of Agriculture later. MR GROUNDS’S DENIAL. Mr W. "Grounds, chairman of the Dairy Control Board, repudiates the authorisation of a statement attributed to him appearing in tho ‘ Post ’ last evening in the form of a telegram from Auckland. The only statement he made, he said, during the week-end was in reply to a question regarding the immediate suspension of control. ■ He then .gave it as his opinion that it would make ‘ ■ confusion worse confounded.” He also informed a reporter in Auckland that the whole question would be discussed at the next meeting of the o board, which is to be held to-morrow *in Wellington.