DAIRYMEN MEET

Evening Star, Issue 19522, 1 April 1927, Page 2

DAIRYMEN MEET

CONTROL POLICY DISCUSSED , AUSTRALIAN SCHEME SUPPORTED Mr Frank Tooraey presided yesterday afternoon at a meeting of Otago dairy factory directors and dairymen called to consider the dairying crisis. The Chairman said that at a meeting of the Waikouaiti Co-operative Dairy Factory directors held recently the vexed question of dairy control had come up for consideration, and it had been decided that'the time was opportune toehold a meeting of dairy farmers and to have a free and frank discussion on the merits or demerits of control. The meeting called for that day was the result of that resolution. They were trying to make an effort to place before the public the opinions of dairy farmers on control, and to have those opinions brought before the proper quarters. They bad had various opinions right through the dominion from various bodies and organisations, purporting to bo the considered opinions of the dairy farmers. Well, as a matter of fact, the people who were passing these resolutions did not in the least represent the dairy farmer. The dairy' farmer was a man who made his living off his dairy farm, not a man who made his living off the dairy farmer. The meeting, however, was a very small one, but the farmers were busy leading in at present, and there was also the recognised apathy of dairy farmers, no matter how and when a time was arranged tor a meeting. He would like to know whether they would want the meeting to go on or whether it should be adjourned to another date. Mr A. J. Gall asked whether the farmers had been circularised individually or whether notices had been sent •only to the dairy factories. _ The Chairman: lam afraid the meeting has been very badly advertised. Mr Gall: It has not been broadcasted enough. The Chairman: That is quiie true. It was at first suggested that another meeting should be called at some future date, and thi? was agreed to. After further discussion the chairman ruled that the meeting could pass a resolution.

Mr John Mocauley then moved—- “ That this meeting is of the opinion that when the present pool closes the Dairy Control Hoard should be elected by a direct vote of the producers, and thinks it advisable® that the board should adopt such a scheme as is in Force in Australia; or, in lieu of such a course, that it should follow on the lines of the scheme adopted by the Meat Control Board.”

In the Meat Board’s scheme, said Mr Macauley, the Government accepted financial responsibility, and that tact tended towards stability. It had been suggested at a meeting of the Otago branch of the New Zealand Farmers’ Union that there was no difference between the Australian and New Zealand schemes. In his opinion, hqwever, there was a decided difference.

The resolution was seconded by Mr A. Wilson and carried by 14 votes to 1. It was decided that copies should be sent to the Dairy Control Board, the Prime Minister, and the Minister of Agriculture. It was aftei wards decided to hold a further meeting on or about April 21. “A NOISY MINORITY.” [Per United Press Association.] HAMILTON, March 31. Criticising the Palmerston North dairy conference to-day, Mr Dynes Fulton (chairman of directors of the New Zealand Dairy Company) said it turned out exactly as he expected. It was only representative of one-fifth of the dairy companies of New Zealand. Peace and goodwill were unknown to the noisy minority, who lost no opportunity of causing a disturbance in the minds of the producers, who wanted a square deal and nothing less.