WELLINGTON DAIRY CONFERENCE

Manawatu Times, 4 May 1926, Page 8

WELLINGTON DAIRY CONFERENCE

FACTS IN A NUT-SHELL,

.WHAT WILL BE THE RESULT?

If the Wellington conference has achieved nothing else. It has assured the “Ward System” of electing the Dairy Board. It lias also shown that the “Council System” is dead and gone. What Is more, however, it lias given a clear indication that a majority of producers are in favour of the supplier retaining his vote.

“Rusticus” has received repeated inquiries as to the real outcome and actual results of the Wellington Conference of dairy afrmers and subsequent deputations to the Prime Minister and a short resume of the proceedings, resolutions and voting may serve a useful purpose. Owing to the general excitement and confusion and the number of resolutions and amendments, the procedure was somewhat involved and difficult to follow. The number of accredited factory representatives present at the conference was approximately 300, while the total number of delegates present must have been over 500. The 300 accredited delegates represented 357 dairy companies, out of a total of 450 in the Dominion. In other words, 80 per cent, of the whole of New Zealand dairy companies were represented at the Conference, either in person or by proxy. On the voting basis prescribed by the Dairy Board and followed by the Conference (one vote for every 100 tons of butter up to 500 tons, and pne vote for every 150 tons thereafter) the total voting power of the Conference was 1149 votes. The dairy produce represented by the Conference was 69,895 tons of cheese and 69,213 tons of butter.

Some difference exists between the figures given by the rival parties as to their respective strength and voting power and after carefully reviewing the figures, "Rusticus” is inclined to think that both parties slightly over-stated their positions. The rollcall taken prior to the commencement of business and the voting im. mediately after tlo retirement of the “left wing" is the Wly true guide and these disclose the following state of parties:— Delegates Co’ys. Votes. Remaining r.-.- 314 328 770 Retired i.r.-y SC 129 379 Total .. 300 357 1,149 The butter and cheese outputs of the respective factions were 49,151 tons butter and 54,639 tons cheese for the former, and 20,062 butter and 15,260 cheese for the latter, the respective totals being 69,213 tons butter and 69,899 tons cheese. The first resolution before the Conference was, that “the Conference is in favour of the individual ward system of electing the Board “one producer to have one vote.” An amendment was moved that the words "one producer one vote” be struck out. By the time the amendment was put to the Conference, tho party moving the resolution had left the Conference as a protest to the chairman’s ruling, that the Conference could not be allowed to determine its own method of voting on the amendment before tho meeting. When a poll of those remaining was taken, it was found that the amendment was carried by 773 votes to 35. The remaining part of the motion —that the Conference is ii, favour of the Ward system—was subsequently carried. The next resolution was in favour Of the directors’ vote without a tonnage basis, one vote for every 100 tons Of butter up to 500 tons and 1 vote for every 150 tons thereafter, total votes of any company not to exceed 150. This was carried on the voices. The most important motion of all is the following one, for although defeated, it clearly shows that a majority of delegates present were in favour of the principle of the pro-i ducers’ vote... It was proposed that a compulsory ballot of suppliers should be taken by each company prior to the directors exercising their vote upon an export tonnage basis and exercise that vote in accordance with the voting of suppliers. - " This really meant the “indiyiduai suppliers vote on a topnago basis” and tho support given this resolution case as a surprise to tho Conference. As a matter of fact, the motion would have been carried had the absent delegates given it Its support ,as tho following figures will show: — Votes. Butter. Cheese. Against .. •. .■ 558 41.407 32.206 For .. ■.. 212 7,744 22,429 Total voting .. 770 49.151 54.639 Had tho conference been complete the voting would, no doubt, have been as follows: Votes. Butter. Cheese. For 212 7,744 22,429 Retired .. .. 379 20,062 1 5,260 Total in favour 591 27,806 37,689 Total ... 558 41,407 32,206 These figures unmistakably show that a majority of delegates wore in favour of retaining the individual suppliers vote, although they differed on the methods to bo followed. This is an important point that should not be lost sight of when the time comes for the introduction of tho necessary legi Isatiou. As to tho rival deputations to the Prime Minister and Hon. O. J. Hawken, both parlies presented their case from their awn point of view. Neither

Mr. Coates nor Mr. Hawken committed himself as lo the Government’s future action, as the mailer is to bo referred to Cabinet with a view of bringing it before Parliament in due course. it is the firm belief in political circles, that as a result of (be Conference the “single ward system,” will bo passed by Parliament with the individual producers’ vote. Tbc reason for such belief is said to lie in tho fact that the Labour Party will vole for tho producers’ vote as well as tbc Liberal Party and a fair section of the Reform Party. Although muen will depend on Cabinet, it cannot ignore the result of the Wellington Conference with its indication towards a suppliers’ vote in some share or form. As a compulsory factory vote is considered impractable and unsatisfactory in many ways, it is held that the pre- • senl system of voting will remain in ’force and all Parliament will do is lo divide Uio North Island in six wards and tho " *■*’ "'land in three wards.