DAIRY BOARD CRITICISED

Manawatu Times, Volume XLIX, Issue 3256, 28 January 1926, Page 7

DAIRY BOARD CRITICISED

SERIOUS BLUNDER BY ENGLISH NEW SB AUER,

The "Westminster Gazette" has made a discovery which will, no doubt come as u great surprise to New Zealand dairy producers, viz. that the Dairy Produce Board has diverted butter shipments to the United States which country has offered higher prices. It is pretty hard on the Board to be blamed by British newspapers as well as Now Zealand producers for things it did not do, but certainly should have done. It is difficult to realise that a paper of such standing as the "Westminster Gazette’’ should seriously blame the New Zealand producers for shipping butter to America if a better price was offered by that country. To blame the New Zealand Dairy Board for such action is only adding to the blunder, for, as is well-known, the Board has so far taken no action whatsoever In the regulating of butter and cheese shipments and supplies. It is well-known, of course, that there are large quantities of butter being held in England just now with a certain reserve, a policy which will hardly find favour with a certain section of the trade. This, however, is done entirely by individual factories and U the result of heavy losses experienced during past years when large quantities of New Zealand dairy produce was dumped on the London market indiscriminately. The Dairy Board has neither directly or indirectly had anything to do with the action of the individual companies. In fact, it must be said to the credit of the local representatives and agents that in most cases the reserves have been placed on the produce in accordance with their advice.

Altho\gh no concerted action was taken, the result is all the more gratifying-. It was fully expeted that the price of butter would drop to 160/or oven lower during January, yet the latest London quotation is 176/- with a Arm market and a rising tendency. Had the New Zealand factories followed the practice of previous seasons and marketed the butter without reserves the earlier expectations would, no doubt, have been realised.

Present events afford ample proof that, given anything like a ■ fair

chance. New Zealand dairy companies are well able to look after the marketing of their own produce. They certainly do not want a repetition of such shipping arrangements as were experienced last November and have every right to look to the Board for considerable improvement in this direction. Once this is accomplished their anxieties and responsbilities will be greatly reduced. As to the statement that ths Board is reducing butter shipments by something like 10,000 tons for the purpose of supplying the American market, one can only repeat that this statement is entirely without any foundation. The only known company who shipped, butter to America, Is the New Zealand Co-operative Dairy Company Hamilton, of which Mr W. Goodfellow—u prominent member of the Board—is Managing Director. The Company was evidently not slow in grasping the position in both Britain and America, and keen resentment h felt in some quarters that this information i\as not passed on to New Zealand butter factories by the Dairy Produce Board. At the same time, the leading article in the Westminster Gazette, is a “foretasie” of what may be expected should v the New Zealand Dairy Board ever seriously interfere with, or attempt to pool and control, the marketing of New Zealand dairy produce on the London market.