THE DAIRY COMMISSION.

Manawatu Standard, Volume LIV, Issue 281, 25 October 1934, Page 6

THE DAIRY COMMISSION.

(To the Editor.) Sir, —The Great War and the depression, which latter is yet with us, with their emotional and economic shocks, will no doubt be given as the cause of the remarkable change which has taken place in the general outlook of the people. Successive bludgeonings in the lonn of crippling taxation, unfortunate legislative experiments, and general interference with the free rights of the citizen have stunned us all more of less into a state of apathy and indifference as to what happens next. This can be the only explanation of the attitude of the country to the most recent, and certainly the most disastrous proposals to date —the recommendations of the Dairy Commission which, in short, advocate the complete Socialisation of this vital primary industry. Thus the country will take another long stride across the narrow strip of sanity separating us from pure Communism, which, consciously or not, is apparently the objective of the socalled Conservative-Liberal Government of which Mr Coates is so obviously the dominant force and who, in turn appears to be unable to resist the influences of a number of civil and seniiStato servants closely associated with him.

The Dairy Commission’s Report, briefly, demands State control of the wdiole industry, embracing the command of local marketing, the licensing of farms, the raising of finance per medium of more extensive borrowing, the confiscation of mortgagees’ capital with reduction of interest, and the establishment of numbers of boards, departments, and supreme councils. Through these revolutionary and highly experimental means it hopes to raise the quality of our butter and cheese, and thus secure a better price on the English market. In other words all these energies (omitting for the moment whether they are of any value or not) are to be expended in almost their entirety in this country—at the production end. There is thus no guarantee (and many will say no possibility) of these expensive “last throw methods commanding a single farthing more for our produce in Great Britain. In other words we are to continue to tackle the problem at the wrong end—we insist on trying to perfect our hospital and cemetery arrangements at the bottom of the cliff, and wonder why so many fall over the unprotected top. No one who knows anything of the quality of our butter, as compared with the Danish article, can account for the difference of 40s or so per cwt. in their respective prices. Experts as well as ordinary consumers agree that there is practically no difference in the quality; certainly not more than the odd shilling or so which for years separated the two ranges of prices. It is plain that the vast discrimination against New Zealand is the result of manipulation by the enormous combines of Tooley Street. They have decided on a course that suits them and all our re-shuffling of controls, frantic Socialistic legislation, licensing, financing and experimentation at this end will not make the slightest impression in that quarter. Our puny resources are too insignificant to fight the controlling combines who could buy the whole of New Zealand for a deer park, if they were so disposed. Any really useful results which are to be achieved can only be encompassed in Britain. In the writer’s opinion, greater results would be obtained and at a fraction of the cost, by a handful of wisely-chosen, trained men from this country undertaking a tour of the Homeland, and by eloquent statement of the position, adequate publicity, and a justifiable appeal to sentiment, bring under the British citizens’ notice the unfair handicap placed on our produce. Could we not explain that it is only by selling our butter, cheese, etc., at reasonable rates that we can hope to liquidate our indebtedness to them and in turn buy more British goods ? These are points which would no doubt appeal to the common-sense of the British investor, business man and worker. Representations could also be made to the British authorities to institute an enquiry regarding the methods of Tooley Street, for no other power less than the British Government has any chance of successfully combating the power of these gigantic corporations. Men of the type of Milner (Waitaki) could do more in England to aid our case than a whole host of economists, experts, boards, and inexperienced farmer-politicians in this country, and for negotiations with the English Government men of the Downie Stewart type are required—those with some claims to the essentials of statesmanship. , Dairy farmers need have no doubt that if they allow the proposed legislation to be foisted upon them they will have lost control of their industry for all time, and probably with it the control, and possibly even the ownership of their properties. The general public, too, are vitally interested, for the effect of this latest legislative gamble would mean further deep _ encroachment on the rights of private citizens, a heavy increase in State servants (who must be maintained from the public ’purse) and the erection of an additional high hurdle in the path of the average person in his struggle for existence. The position of lenders on farm securities will be unenviable, for they will be faced with another heavy cut in interest and, under given circumstances, with a reduction in principal as well. Those who stand to gain are those mainly responsible for the report—the official secretariat, the personnel of certain colleges and universities, and members of departments existent and to be created—whose status and prospects must be greatly enhanced by the adoption of the recommendations. The public must rouse themselves if their long cherished rights are to be protected in time, and demand an end to this mad race towards Russian ideals of life and “liberty.”—l am, etc., SANE MEASURES.