MARKETING DEPT. ESTIMATES DEBATED

Grey River Argus, 7 October 1949, Page 7

MARKETING DEPT. ESTIMATES DEBATED

Milk and Eggs Question

WELLINGTON, October 6

A division on an Opposition amendment to reduce the vote for the Marketing Department (Milk Marketing) by £5, as an expression that the House did not approve the methods of acquiring milk treating houses, helped to revive interest in the estimates debate in the House of Representatives in the early hours of this morning. The amendment was moved by Mr. E. B. Corbett (Opposition, Egmont) and was lost by 34 to 30 votes. Mr Corbett, Mr. W. A. Sheat (Oppn. Patea), Mr. J. N. Massey (Oppn., Franklin) and other Opposition members expressed their dissatisfaction at the reply by the Minister of Agriculture, Mr. E. L. Cullen, to their requests for further information on an item of £259,100 for the purchase and erection of treating houses and staff accommodation, the purchase and installation of new plant, the acquisition of vending interests, the acquisition of shares in companies having among their objects the handling of milk for human consumption, and incidental expenses. The Minister said that when milk treating houses were acquired they would be handed over to municipal corporations as soon as the necessary arrangements could be made. Included in the list of proposed purchases was £103,000 for' a treating house in Christchurch.

The vote was passed. The vote for the Marketing Account also produced some animated debating with the Opposition bers critical of various aspects of the marketing of potatoes, eggs, honey, onions and other produce. Used To Export Eggs

Mr. W. H. Gillespie (Oppn., Hurunui) said New Zealand used to export eggs, but we now imported from Australia, egg pulp equivalent to 4,200,000 dozen eggs. Mr. Gillespie and Mr. D. C. Kidd (Oppn., Waitaki) referred to the loss of £159,000 last year on potato marketing and claimed that this was due to Government bungling. Mr. W. J. Broadfoot (Oppn., Waitomo) asked why it was necessary to import £546 worth of honey last year from Australia when New Zealand grew a crop of 5000 tons. Mr. E. B. Gordon (Oppn., Rangitikei) said one of his constituents had told him that after the Government had paid £4OO for 20 tons of firstgrade onions last season, the onions were left to rot on the banks of the Turakina river.

Mr. A. Sutherland (Oppn.,) Hauraki) said there had been a proposal to market eggs by the weight. He hoped th e public would be protected, because if eggs were kept a certain time they became lighter. A Government voice: Election eggs. Mr. Cullen said that selling eggs by Poultry Board, not by the department. There was a potato surplus because of the phenomenal crops last year in New Zealand and elsewhere, and no firm offers were received for the sale of New Zealand' potatoes overseas. The department did not pulp eggs in this country', but was giving advice on better techniques to private enterprise and co-operative interests which did the pulping. There had also been an onion surplus last season, but the Government had honoured its contracts with the growers, as it did with the potato growers.

Foodstuffs Dumped

Mr. Corbett said it was “a shockingdisgrace that even in these so-called times of plenty valuable foodstuffs should be dumped in New Zealand. Surely' when potatoes were of good quality they could have been sent to pensioners and others who would have been glad of them.

Mr. A. C. Baxter (Govt., Raglan) said that the Government would not let any' primary producer down as the member for Egmont seemed to want.

Mr. Sutherland said the farmers had carried the people of the country' on their backs for the last 14 years. It was not what the Government had done for the farmers but what the Government had done them for.

Mr. Cullen said that the import of honey from Australia was for use in the manufacture of tobacco. It was low-grade honey' and inedible.

After a little further discussion, the vote was passed and the House rose at 1.55 a.m. until 2.30 p.m. today.