QUALITY OF MILK

Manawatu Standard, Volume LXVI, Issue 15, 15 December 1945, Page 6

QUALITY OF MILK

POWERS OF BOARD MAYOR CRITICISES ACT “Owing to the misconception that exists in the city in regard to the recently-appointed Palmerston North Metropolitan Milk Board, and the blame attributed to the .board for the very poor quality of milk that has been delivered in the city in recent months, I feel it incumbent on me, as chairman of the board, to make a public statement, and disclaim any responsibility for the wretchedly poor quality milk.”

Thus stated the chairman (Mr Mansford) at a meeting of the board last evening, when the subject received much attention.

“The Government, with the object no doubt of securing an adequate supply of pure milk for the larger centres, introduced the Milk Act in 1944, added Mr Mansford. “There was, under the provision of this Act, to be a Central Milk Council and a local authority. The function of the Central Milk Council, which consists of five nominated members, together with the Minister of Health (Mr Nordmeyer) and the Director of Milk Marketing (Mr H. H. Innes), is to lie the Dominion governing authority in regard to the quality of milk, its treatment and delivery. It has very wide powers as regards prices and subsidies, to hear and settle disputes should such arise between interested parties, and generally make recommendations to the Government from time to time for the improvement and supply of milk. The local authority .could be a committee of a City or Borough Council, or a Metropolitan Milk Board, whose members are elected from two or more adjoining local bodies. The local authority has certain powers given to it under the Act to ensure the supply,. the treating, and delivery of milk, so that it will be of a recognised standard as ' to quality. It will, I think, be readily seen that the board has three interested parties to deal with: (a) The producers ; (b) the treating house proprietors ; and (c) the vendors. WEAKNESS IN LEGISLATION. “The Palmerston North Milk Board was constituted in July, 1945, and held its first meeting on August 2, 1945. It was found out at that meeting that the legislation had been so hastily conceived that there was a flaw in it; that we could not secure our levy. We had no money and no means of getting any. We were advised to make application to the Central Milk Council for an advance of £IOO to allow us to carry on and meet out-of-pocket expenses. We duly made the application but so far we have not seen enough to purchase a 2d stamp. The whole of the activities of the local board are cramped by lack of finance. How we are expected _ to retain the services of paid officials without finance Ido not know. I hesitate to ask these officials to do anything, knowing that we owe them money and cannot pay them.

“The principal weakness in the legislation is that our inspector cannot go on the farm, without the owner’s or the Producers’ Association’s consent. If the board is to function successfully, this right must be given to the board’s inspector. We must control the milk

from the farm to the consumer. “Another weakness-—certainly only a temnorary one—is that when the draft by-laws as forwarded to us were submitted to the board’s solicitors it was found they were totally unsuited. When this was reported to the Director of Milk Marketing _ a hastily-called conference of various boards’ solicitors was held in Wellington with the result that a new set has been redrafted. , ‘‘Before the Palmerston North Board was constituted, the Director of Milk Marketing informed us that he was endeavouring to get a contract with the suppliers for a supply of milk for the city. We have been told that a contract has been made by the Central Milk Council. We have not seen it and in consequence wo do not know who constitutes the Producers’ Association. .

“In regard to the treating house, this is privately-owned, but provision is made in the legislation for the board to own and control its own treating house if it so desires. Although the present treating house is privately-owned, we have certain powers of inspection. RETENTION OF ZONING.

“The vendors draw their supply of milk, both raw and pasteurised, Irom the treating house and deliver it in tneir allotted zones. Zoning was first introduced as a war measure in October, 1942, to conserve petrol and tyres j . whilst many people did not look on it favouranly, tney put up with it as one of the consequences of being at war. The Milk Act, which has since been introduced, makes provision for retaining the zoning system. “I feel that the board has suffered in its administration by lack of funds, and by a want of firmness on the part of the Director of Milk Marketing. Surely a man experienced in organisation! and having necessary firmness and resolve, would have got the interested parties together and stated plainly what the policy of the Milk Council was and what he wanted —to try to deal with them separately and tell them different stories is fatal. His vacillating policy of dealing with the treating house is not tending to settle this very important side of the milk supply as far as this city is concerned. What is the use of his coming here and talking of forming utility companies or the board purchasing the buildings and plant, when he has not yet provided us with enough finance to purchase a 2d stamp ? Naturally the board hesitates before it incurs any further liability than it already has. We asked the Central Milk Council to appoint representatives of the Ministers of Health and Agriculture, but so far no representatives have been appointed. “I think I am safe in saying that the members of the board feel that the scheme has been too hastily launched and that proper thought has not been given to all the details of organisation and finance necessary in such a proposal as the production, treatment and delivery of pure milk for cities the size of or larger than Palmerston North. “This board has suffered, and possibly others have too, as a result of the scheme being hurriedly launched without due consideration being paid to all the details, and it is imperative, under the present set-up, ..that if we are to have pure milk the board’s inspectors must have the right of going on to the suppliers’ farms. If this right is given to the hoard, and the Central Milk Council formulates a policy for controlling treating houses and adequate finance is provided, then this board and others will be able to function satisfactorily . and see that an adequate supply of pure milk is supplied to our citizens.” CAUSES OF UNREST. Reporting on the milk supply position generally in Palmerston North, the board’s inspector (Mr T. G. Turley) said: “It is definitely felt in certain sections of the trade, that this

setting up of another authority to govern the milk industry, was unwarranted and was adding an additional burden on the consumers.” He pointed out that a levy was to be made on every gallon of milk sold. Those sections of the trade which were objecting to the establishment of a board had gone out of their way to spread propaganda against the board and it was causing some unrest amongst the public. A lot of unrest in the milk trade today had been caused by the Milk Marketing Department, through its officers, in that they had met each section of the trade separately and told each in turn a different story. The board had not been consulted in various decisions made at those meetings, yet the board was expected to formulate a policy which, in some cases, conflicted with what the department had told the trade. .Representatives from the trade had been to Wellington, interviewed the department, and received a decision, and the board had not been told of that decision. All sections of trade, the board and the department" should be working co-operatively to achieve a common objective, namely, to supply the consumer with the best milk possible at the cheapest rate.