MILK SUPPLY.

Evening Star, Issue 25168, 6 May 1944, Page 6

MILK SUPPLY.

TO THE EDITOR. Sir,—The so-called Consumers' Association, Mr Burgess and friends, are anxious to. have implimented "control" of milk distribution. Control usually means interference in private industry and enterprise by bureaucrats from State departments. Have we not already enough interference by bureaucratic pseudo-experts in almost every business, and in our every-day life? The Health Department, empowered by suitable legislation and with qualified personnel, should be sufficient to protect the milk consumer and ensure a satisfactory standard of cleanliness and purity. What then can the nature , of the " control " desired be, other than bureaucratic? Then there is a second group, the medical zealots, who are flat out for pasteurisation of all domestic milk supplies in the city. They say this must be made compulsory. A wealth of data has been forthcoming to prove the case for pasteurisation. Yet there is a large section of the community still _ not convinced. A modern pasteurisation establishment and the machinery entail a large capital expenditure, hence ■ the need for centralised " control," which means the elimination of all smaller vending -concerns and individuals, distributors, alike. Thirdly, the city councillors appear to consider it their business to keep clear of the milk industry. Cr Cameron stated at a meeting recently that the capital involved would be £250,000, or' more. Then we are aware of the recently-reorganised large milk vending concern, in the background, which will be chiefly interested in profits. We: were told that even before the Milk Commission's report was released this concern had engineered licenses to import expensive machinery from overseas. The Dunedin area, including suburbs, would be large enough for this concern to realise satisfactory financial results. Legislation will shortly be enacted by the Socialistic Government (monopolistic in practice), making pasteurisation compulsory. , Finally; we have the " apathetic consumer," whose only interest is that- he retains " freedom of choice." The apathetic consumer may yet prove to be not so apathetic if he realises that a scheme for pasteurised) milk is to he imposed regardless of his desire for clean, pure milk; Hot necessarily cooked (pasteur-

ised) before delivery. Dr Hercud, the recent meeting, mentioned that ;wa eat our food cooked; we wouldn't think of eating beef uncooked; then why mot drink cooked milk? .The trouble is we do mostly " cook " our eats, or they are " cooked " beforehand for us. De* vitalised foods lead to disaster, sickness, and disease.

It is to be hoped that the public will soon be shown that there b another side to the milk question* As yet ho attempt has been made by those qualified to do so, to present " the case for pure raw milk.". "Why not?—l am* etc., C.E.M. May 5.