DAIRY BOARD

Gisborne Times, Volume LXXI, Issue 11327, 3 October 1930, Page 5

DAIRY BOARD

DISSATISFACTION WITH ELECTION SYSTEAf.

PERSONNEL CRITICISED

GOVERNMENT URGED TO MAKE ALTERATION.

NO ACTION TAKEN

(Press Association.) WELLINGTON, Oct 2.

Tn the House of Representatives Mr. Lye presented the report of the Public Petitions Committee on the petition of A. If. Owen and fifty-five others, praying for nil amendment of the 'Dairy Produce Export Control Act. The committee reported that in the absence of sufficient evidence of any widespread desire, for such a change as the petition requested, it had no recommendation to make.

Mr. Wilkinson (i.) said he regretted that a more favorable report had hot been made to the' House. The Act had been a hive of contention ever since it was passed, and to-day the Board was costing the farmers £IO,OOO per year. The board could well reduce its expenditure, for at present the personnel was too large. Air MacDonald (U.) said that under the system of voting on a tonnage basis it was wealth which deckled the constitution of tho Board, and thp average producer had little to do with it. He moved: “That the report be referred back'to the'committee for further consideration.” The amendment was seconded by Mr. Lysnnr (I.), who said the Dairy Board* would have to he either reconstituted or scrapped. The Govem.ment nominees and representatives ‘of commercial interests should he eliminated from the hoard, which at present was loaded against producers.

Air. Martin (L.) suggested that Mr. MacDonald was not' a\vare of what the petitioners actually sought. They had been asked, if they favored the reconstitution of the board, and had agreed that this would bn an improvement, hut what they really desired was the opportunity of voting whether the Board should continue to' exist or riot. Mr Martin added that lie was satisfied this was not wanted by the producers. He agreed there was dissatisfaction with the tonnage basis of olecliori. Mr. J. Nash (R.) said he thought tbe personnel of the board could be reduced. The board bad made serious misiakes in the past. It had been given powers that were ten wide.

Mr. Hogan (I.) took exception to the contract, the Dairy 'Board had made with' shipping* companies, whereby it was not possible to ship produce from certain ports, such as Wanganui. This contract established a policy of centralisation, tn the ruination of a number of smaller ports, and to the detriment of many dairy factories. lie urged that, the Government should lose nn time in altering the •eustitution of the hoard. ~ , , . , , Mr. Hall (R) said he desired to remind the House that tbe petition bail asked that a poll of producers should be taken to determine whether tbe Dairy Control Roard should or shouid hot lie abolished. He bad not heard one member suggest, that tbe board should be abolished. _ Ho considered an imperial Gomnuttoo could not have reached any other decision than that which had' been reported to the. House, especially m view of t'lio fact that the petitioners had not produced any evidence of a widespread desire for the change_ advocated. Nothing could he gained by referring the report back to the committee. , , , Mr. Poison 'T.) declared that the question of the amalagamation of the Meat Board and • the Dairy Board should he given the earnest consideration of tho House. r I lie business could be more economically and equally efficiently conducted by a single executive. Air. Lye said he believed the powers' of the' Dairy Control Board should he restricted, and he agreed with, those who had ciiticised the tonnage basis of election. Ho realised, however. that the leeonstitution of the board was a matter apart from the subject of petition, and he assured the House that nothing could he gained by referring tile report hack to the committee. . Air. Holland, Labor Leader, said bo understood the object oi the petitionwas to have a referendum taken on the qustion of whether the hoard should continue to exist dr not. It that wore so, the proper way to .have gone about tbe matter would have been to have presented- the petition signed by at last one-tenth of tbe producers. In that- case the House would have had no option hut to have granted the .request for a. referendum. He agreed there would he no good purpose served by referring the report back to the committee. At the same time, lie pointed out that lie and his party strongly disapproved of the present undemocratic system of electing the board. The amendment, was allowed to be defeated on the voices, and the report- was laid upon the table.