DAIRY CONTROL

Hawera Star, Volume XLVI, 17 May 1927, Page 5

DAIRY CONTROL

PRIME MINISTER’S REPLY.

MINIMUM PRICE-FIXING. CONFERENCES IN ENGLAND. (RY TELEGRAPH PRESS ASSOCIATION.) DARGAVILLE, May 16. A reply to Mr H. E: Holland”® statement regarding the Prime Minister’s part in the dairy control dispute was made by Mr Coates at Dargaville last night. He said: “Mr Holland asks the country to believe that the Prime Minister has never been honest in the part he took or in the votes he recorded in connection with the dairy produce legislation for which he was responsible to Parliament, and it would appear that he bases his conclusions almost solely upon the appointment of Mr Paterson as a member «f the London agency of the New Zealand Dairy Producers’ Board.

“From Mr Holland’s utterances, he seems to lie far better posted in the doings of Mr Paterson and his motives than I have ever been aware of. I hokl no brief for Mr Paterson, hut I wish to he fair to him. Ido not believe that Mr Paterson would 1 for one moment lend himself to any ulterior motive. He stated his reasons foT coming to his conclusions, regarding the advisability of not pursuing at the time the policy of price fixation which had been decided upon by t-he hoard. To assert that I was in league with Mr Paterson or he with me is untrue and unjust. My own connection with the matter arise only after I became convinced of the serious 'position that the New Zealand dairy producer might be placed in by any move likely to place his product at a disadvantage as compared with similar products in the Home market.

“Here may I- state that- my conclusions were arrived at' after information had come into my possession from many reliable sources. There are those who say that Mr Paterson’s cable to the board was sent with my approval.. Such a statement is incorrect. The cable referred! to was not sent with my approval, though I knew of it. The telegram sent by myself to the Government of New * Zealand expressed- by far the -hulk of the opinions which, as I have already said, had been conveyed l to me from very many reliable sources. For anyone to suggest that the trade influences in England were not powerful is to ignore deliberately what was an obvious fact. When informed as to the real and far-reaching nature, and this was . entirely irrespective of whatever might have been honestly my own personal opinion, the real issue, as I saw matters, turned on this question: Couldi the New Zealand Dairy Control Board win through with their policy of price fixation ? “Without traversing all the factors which, no deuht, the board realised, one may mention two main causes likely to be very difficult at the outset. First 6f all there was the fact that, at the time the board assumed control, a very large quantity of butter was held in store in London by the dairy companies. This was- butter which had probably missed the season, and was being held for, higher prices and- likely to come on to the market at any time. Secondly, there was the undeniable fact that definite hostility existed amongst the trade and, indeed, had been spread to the retailers and consumers.

“I challenge any person, with a knowdedg© of the position founded on fact, to controvert the conclusions at which I arrived. Having then formed my views, in spite of possible misinterpretation on the part of producers, I decided- to acquaint the Government in the Dominion of the position as I saw it, especailly as I bad, like most people, a keen appreciation of the extent to which the Dominion’s prosperity is linked' up with the dairy industry. “I was also desirous l that the representatives of the producers in the Dominion should! not, without fuller consideration, follow a. course which ample and reliable evidence. had shown was full of risk to the position of our dairy produce on the Home market. “It has been stated that I was hostile to the board’s manager in London. To remove such a wrong impression I need only quote the following extract from the verbatim report of my conference with the members of the board and representatives of the trade in London on November 8 last. This is ■what I said: ‘I am well acquainted with the New Zealand Dairy Co-opera-tive Association in New r Zealand', its personnel and its directors. So far as the directors are concerned, and I think the suppliers also, they have absolute confidence in their representative in London. There is no doubt about that. They have absolute and complete confidence in their London manager, Mr Wright.’ “I should like also to quote some of my remarks regarding cooperative marketing concerning which, 1 notice, some of my opponents have been industriously misrepresenting. “These are some of the views I expressed at the meeting to which I have already referred: ‘First of all I want to telf the delegation that, so far as control is concerned, and, as its effects New Zealand, it has come to stay. The next thing is how’ can we best overcome any' difficulty or misunderstanding that exists here in connection with the supply of New Zealand butter on to the market. Mty whoie object is to see if we cannot get down to the points of this agreement, and ascertain whether it is possible to overcome these difiiculties.

“ 4 So long as the farmer desired to combine in order to handle his pioduee, up to a certain point it had to be taken for granted, and without argument, that he would do so. It must

be remembered that there is no harder working section of the community than the dairy farmers. The great bulk of export from New Zealand was from co-operative companies, produced by co-operative effort. I went on to say that the Government in no sense controlled or interfered with the board,.’ “ ‘The Government had now’ come into it. The producer asked for certain legislation. Parliament agreed to that legislation by a large majority in each case. That was not to say, however, that there w r ere no opponents 1 to the board, or to the idea of the board. I am perfectly convinced that the legislation will stand in some form or other, the idea being just as I Rave ali'eady stated, namely, in connection with, the handling of produce up to some point,’ “I have never suggested that price fixation was the cause of lower prices. The difficulty the hoard found itself up against in London, was undoubtedly the large quantity of butter found in store there and the fact that, the trade in England knew the position thoroughly well, being thus in a. position to ignore the board’s offerings if they thought fit. In addition to that it was quite certain there was a very

genuine opposition to the policy of price fixation. ‘.‘l have been much interested in one new feature of the speeches recently by the Leader of the Opposition, and i that is his sudden professed anxiety for the welfare of the primary producers. In this connection 1 ask him one question: Why did he not display the same concern some 18 months ago in connection with the transport of the farmers’ produce to the Home markets “On that occasion if I remember ightly, Mr Holland was not so anxious as to the effect of the disastrous shipping strike on the dairy producer of this country. I can 6ay deliberately to-day that one of the main causes of so much of our butter accumulating in store in London was a direct result of the shipping strike, which led to a complete disorganisation of vital transport arrangements. In addition, there was a great coal strike at Home, which had a very direct bearing on the demand for our dairy produce. Again, if my memory serves me correctly, Mr Holland said nothing and did nothing that contributed to a reasonable attitude being pursued in that conection. Nor do I remember any public repudiation by him of the notorious Mr Cook, whom we know now was closely in touch with Moscow throughout that- lamentable industrial crisis. “In my opinion, there has never at any time been a greater need for clear thought and careful action in the light of circumstances surrounding the dairy industry. I suggest that our citizens, whether in the country or the , town, should-pause very carefully before seriously listening to the proposals of the Labour Party, which Mr Holland enunciates in the direction of ' Government control of the handling and distrubution of foodstuffs.

‘‘‘Such proposals are closely related to the already notorious planks of the Socialist platform, namely, the socialisation of the means of production distribution and exchange, a policy, in my judgement, fraught with danger, particularly to an agricultural and pastoral country like New Zealand. “In concluding my remarks on this subject, I desire to repeat what I have already told the country, namely, that the opposition to the poliey of minimum price fixation was over-s whelming, not only by traders but also by consumers, 'and there was also, in addition, imminent danger of losing that friendly co-operation which was so essential for the successful marketing of our produce. “I feel sure that even Mr. Grounds, who was staying at the same hotel in London as myself, will admit that, on all occasions when we conferred together, I was as keenly desirous as he was that the board’s operations in London should be successful and in’ the best interests of our dairy producers, and that my counsel was always at his disposal whenever he sought it, as one who has followed farming all his v life, a life in which da.jry farming has played no small part." f. “I think my fellow producers will. do me the justice of believing that ’ both as Prime Minister and as one Pf themselves, I am actuated only by. a conscientious desire to I enhance the.,., welfare of the farmer and all other sections of the people. I take this opportunity of adding that, in the event of the New Zealand Dairy Produce Export Control Act again coming be-. fere Parliament, I am of the opinion that the word “control” should be altered. “This term creates an impression that tends to prejudice our productsin certain markets. I suggest, as an alternative, that a more suitable term would be the New Zealand Dairy Producers’ Co-operative Marketing Boardor some other and more appropriate designation.”

SHIPMENT OF PRODUCE. TO OTHER PARTS THAN LONDON. RECENT RISE IN PARIS. AUCKLAND, May 17. In am address to the Society of Accountants. Mr W. Grounds, chairman of the Dairy Produce Board, said that attention was being given by the Board to shipping to ports other than. Loftdon, which he thought could be 'achieved now that there was a central organisation that oou’d pirevent the glutting which was created when the companies. shipped indiscriminately on! their own initiative. , , s .. He said that the recent rise in the price of New Zealand produce in England was undoubtedly due, in a large measure, to the hoard having reduced its weeldv ouota of 90,000 boxes of butter .and. 45,000 crates of cheese. He declined to state the extent of the reduction.