THE DAIRY BOARD

Hawera Star, Volume L, 6 February 1931, Page 4

THE DAIRY BOARD

FARMERS’ UNION CRITICISM

NEW ZEALAND CHEESE GRADING. c i O'in Vi EM BI’JUS DISSATISFIED Following on the receipt of a letter from air iv. toms, cnairman of the jiany no ant to Mr Poison, winch was read at yesterday's meeting or the executive ol the. Farmers’ Union, some outspoken criticism of the -board was made by delegates and a call was made tor a aecideu reduction in the cost of running it. jhe tetter referred tta the criticism ol the board at fanners’ meetings and too resolutions passed which Mr lornsueueved was done in an absence of a . Knowledge of the full position. He reierred to the fact that last year’s levy amounted to 10s per farmer, the suin of £25,000. being paid for ordinary expenditure, with t-n-o inclusion of a system or shipping inspection by which produce was landed in a condition bet-L-er than ever before. In addition cto.oOO was paid for advertising in orreut Britain and £4OOO on scientific research. The board also supplied inlormutioii and statistics of value to the industry. The savings effected, he said, far more than compensated for the expenditure, seeing that freights represented a saving of £348,000 per annum and an insurance of £35,000 per annum while the sorting of butter and cheese in cold store meant an additional saving ol £2-0,000 annually. Mr YY'. Ei. Garter said the board did I not warrant its cos.t of running and j tiie whole oust came from the output or the "cows on the farm.” He said chat shipping was never in so- bad a condition as at the -present time, while insurance reductions could have been secured without the board's help. The quality of the cheese was not good, but lie did not know if it could be all ascribed to standardisation, because many factories had -been putting out a lirsGclass article. He referred to the excellent reports received on the Mangatoki cheese and said that such factories were suffering, for those who put out a bad article. He considered the board could have done much more to ' n-elp the marketing, while the Dairy Division should see that cheese was graded to suit the consumer, by having a transference periodically of graders in order to get English experience. They would then be able to grade, as it- were, six months ahead and thus •suit the requirements of the consumer. His experience at Home told him that die people were not particular about paying more for the article they liked, but if the cheese was rotten they did not want it at all. The board could have done more in these respects and ■aid not warrant the paying of such high salaries. Mr Jennings: “The article graded ~igli (here apparently does not snit people at the other end.” Mr Carter remarked that better cheese was made years ago, when farming conditions were much worse than now, but it was certain that the average farm was. much more suitable to producing good milk than -before. Air J. Choker said that he had been very much in favour of control, but the board had “rushed its hurdles’.’ and that was the end of it. He instanced several cases of high graded cheese which did not secure good prices at Home, the factories sending it paying out- a good deal less than others less highly graded. “We are not grading to the taste of the people at Home,”, he added, “and must give what the fellow at the other end wants.” The Dairy Board, he said, was not earning its money and “Strawberry”, had. to bear it all. There were too many hoards and the industry was over governed. The National Dairy Association could have done just as much good-, and have secured the same concessions. The sooner the board was cleaned up the hotter. .Mr Booth referred to the good man Canada got from New Zealand in Mr Ruddick, and added that with all the dairy inspectors no better cheese was made, despite the improved conditions on the farms. Mr Thrush said a motion of condemnation had been sent from Tokaora and approved by the executive, and thereiore no further motion was required He suggested the letter lie on the table. Mr Cocker considered they should do something as an executive, and if they kept on -pegging away, they would impress the Dominion Executive and the board. The industry could not stand the costs of the board, and these must be reduced. There were four offices ciiicl four istaff.s and not ono was doin°“ its job. ** Mr Carter; “One board could do the Jot of the work.” .Air Cocker said that the letter did not convince the meeting that the board justified the expenditure incurred- and that the efficiency of the board called for attention and reduction in cost of running.

The matter of framing a resolution ruicl forwarding it to the executive was deferred till next meeting.