PROPOSED DAIRY POOL.

Manawatu Standard, Volume XLIII, Issue 401, 19 May 1922, Page 5

PROPOSED DAIRY POOL.

IMPORTANT GATHERING

APPROVAL OP THE PRINCIPLE.

(Per Press Association.) WELLINGTON, May 18. A representative meeting, consisting of about one hundred delegates from all over Now Zealand, attended the conference today to consider the formation of a compulsory Dominion dairy pool. Mr Morton was appointed chairman, and stated that iho meeting was called to approve or otherwise of the proposal to form a compulsory pool and devise necessary ways and moans.

When on ihe question of voting, it transpired that tho South Island delegates had no power to vote for or against the proposal, but were solely present in order to obtain all the information of the scheme. Tho follow 'ing motion was carried unanimously: “Unit this meeting of delegates, being representative of the whole of the Dominion, express their entire approval in tlm setting up of a compulsory Dominion organisation to effectively control the handling, marketing and distribution of tho export of our dairy produce.” Before proceeding with the discussion of ways and means, it was made quite clear that whatever this conference may decide upon, tho whole matter is to be referred to the directors and suppliers of the various, dairy companies before definite steps will be taken.

Mr Corrigan proposed that the delegates confirm tho principle of forming a limited company with £1,000,000 capital.’ Tho general opinion was that such a capital was too large, and would be unfavourably received by dairy companies. Mr A. Lancaster pointed put that to absorb £1.080.000 capital would mean £7 pet ton on tho output of cheese, which In most instances would exceed the capital of individual companies. Tho amount of the capital was eventually reduced to £250,000, with a provision that not more than £160.000 be allocated in tho first year, such allocation to be according to the output of factories...

Strong doubt was expressed as to whether the Government would give compulsory powers and financial backing to a limited company, and it was eventually decided that should the Government refuse to give the necessary powers to a private company, a committee bo appointed to devise some scheme to meet the requirements of both the Government and the suppliers. After a lengthy discussion, it was decided that the company be controlled by a board of fifteen directors.

Strong exception was taken by the South Island delegates to the number of directors to bo allocated to Canterbury, Otago, and Southland, they being of opinion that at least live directors should be apportioned to the South Island, being one-third of the whole board.

The North Island directors pointed out that according to output the South Island was only entitled to two directors. It was dually agreed, however, to concede four seats on' the board. This compromise did not prove acceptable to the southern members, and after a two-hour discussion the matter was adjourned. .Clause 5 was adopted, providing for the directors in New Zealand to appoint a board in London of at least, two representatives and a managing director, with power to control prices and regulate sup-

plies. It was made very clear that the whole of the existing channels of distribution in London would be used.

Mr Goodfellow explained that It was proposed that the London board would, in the beginning of the season, allocate quantities of produce to the various firms according to their requirements, and in return these firms would establish credits in New Zealand, with which the company would finance suppliers. In the evening Mr Morton moved that the Government, bo asked to introduce necessary legislation to make compulsory the marketing of all export dairy produce through rite company, and to give power to the directors to make a levy on all exported produce of not. more than one per cent, on the gross proceeds, and that such amount be credited to the share capital.—This was adopted. It was further agreed that it be a recommendation to the dairy division that all butter grading 92 per cent, and over, and till cheese grading 91 per cent, and over, be marketed as superfine.

Mr Singleton, of the Dairy Division, stated that he was willing to recommend the above to his department, and in reply to a question said that approximately 53 per cent, of the butter and 44 per cent, of the cheese would, under tho above scheme, be graded superfine. Finally it was decided to ask tho Government to give the necessary guarantee for the financing of shipments, etc. It was generally held that it was a great •weakness in the .scheme to have to depend on the capital of Tooley Street merchants, and the sooner the company could do without their financial backing, the better for the dairy industry in New Zealand.

PROCEEDINGS THIS MORNING

WELLINGTON, May 19.

When the conference of co-operative dairy company delegates met this morning to consider further details of the dairy pool ilie main anxiety was as to whether the difficulty over the representation of the North and South Islands on the Board of Directors had been smoothed out overnight. It was indicated at the outset today that a solution might be possible, and the matter will be considered later. Tho problem of shareholders’ votes is now under discussion. Mr Grounds (North Auckland) moved that tho voting should bo on the basis of one vote for 100 shares, two for 200, three for 400, four for 700, live for 1000. and a further vote for every additional 1000. This amendment was carried. Mr Goodfellow (South Auckland) then moved that the voting be on the shareholding basis, but that no one company should have more than two seats on the board, thus bringing the meeting back to one share one vote>. with the safeguard of a limitation of two directors from any one company.

A BRITISH OBJECTION. By Electric Telegraph.—Copyright. LONDON, May 17. The committee of the Home and For* eign Produce Exchange, representing all branches of the provision trade in London and the home counties, passed a resolution that the proposed New Zealand produce pool is against the best interests of trade and is particularly undesirable because a , pool trust is invariably disadvantageous to the consumers.—A. and N.Z. cable.