A Change of Policy by the Dairy Produce Control Board

Manawatu Times, Volume XLIX, Issue 3491, 29 October 1926, Page 9

A Change of Policy by the Dairy Produce Control Board

Mr Corrigans Notice of Motion Fails to See Daylight Has the Board Got Hold of the Wrong Mr Wright ? What may he regarded as a decided change of policy was adopted by the New Zealand Dairy Produce Control Board at Its meeting at Wellington on Wednesday. >lr Corrigan’s notice of motion was circumvented by the recommendation of a scheme, the success of which depends entirely on its application. The outstanding feature of the meeting was a cable received from Mr Coates, which—among other tilings—stressed the unpopularity of the Board's Loudon manager with the Home trade. Under the new scheme, however, the determination of prices, instead of being in the hands of one man, is placed in the hands of several, although the Board has the final say. ' (From Our Wellington Correspondent.)

WELLINGTON, Thursday.

Tho announcement made by the Dairy Produce Board after its meeting yesterday was to the effect that full consideration had been given to the Board’s marketing policy, and that after a comprehensive discussion by a full attendance of New Zealand members unanimously decided to instruct the London agency of the Board to arrange a meeting of all importers of New Zealand butter and cheese for the purpose of electing a committee of three, such committee to be available for conferences with the London agency and the London manager for the naming of selling prices of butter and cheese from time to time. It is also stated that certain safeguards were provided for the protection of the producer’s rights. A notice of motion referring to tho prices question was withdrawn. The Board also decided to authorise the expenditure of £20,000 for advertising on a scheme to bo immediately undertaken by tho London agency, with a view to increasing the consumption of Now Zealand dairy produce and the development of New Zealand markets throughout Britain. Industry’s Serious Position. It is generally admitted here, that in spite of the non-committal statement as made by the Board, the Dominion’s largest industry is faced with an extremely serious positioi. This is emphasised, not only by the decision of the Board (which in itself has more than ordinary significance), but by a cable from the Prime Minister (the Right Hon. .1. G. Coates) in London, 'who advises that anything in tho nature of pricefixing will be detrimental to the interests of the New Zealand producer.

is stipulated for the joint committee to meet, it being left to the trend of the market at the Home end. Mr. Corrigan’s Attitude This decision evidently met with Mr. Corrigan’s approval and he withdrew his motion regarding the Board’s policy of the fixation of prices. His attitude appears to have been, that it would bo far better to have unanimity among the members of the Board, and secure the result which ho desired through a diverse channel, than to have the members of the Board divided upon l an issue which, besides being vital, was being w'atohcd intently by those interested in the market at Home. It was estimated that of the eight members who attended the Board meeting yesterday, five would have been in favour of Mr. Corrigan’s notice of motion had it been pressed to a division and discussed fully. The question is being asked in local trade circles; Why was it not brought forward, and the feeling of the members tested one way or the other? The Wrong Mr, Wright It is generally thought that the Board was influenced in its final decision by a lengthy cable received from Mr. Coates as much as by Mr. Corrigan’s notice of motion. As was cabled out a few days ago, an interview took place between the Prime Minister and the Home trade, which judging from Mr. Coates’ cable, was of a very outspoken nature. T am informed from a very reliable source that the cable from Mr. Coates dealt with three definite and very important factors: — (1) That (he Home trade was against absolute control. (2) They strongly objected to price-fixing, and (3) ’They object,cd (O the policy propounded by the Boards London manager, Mr Wright) _ It is understood that Mr Coates intimated that the trade was prepared to accept control, providing it could equitably work in with it. In re. Terence to the second he specifically stated that anything in the nature of price-fixing would be detrimental to tho interests of the producers bore; and regarding the third he said it appeared evident that the trade did not possess confidence in Mr. Wright as London manager. The unpopularity of tho Board’s London manager with the Homo trade has been stressed on a number of occasions and past rumours on this poin‘ appear to be confirmed by Mr, Coates’ suggestion. that it would be in tbn interests of the producers to give the fullest consideration to the wishes of the trade. As To The Future.

Tho Board, it appears, has agreed to confer with tho London merchants, but, at the same time, reserves the right to override any decision that may bo arrived at.

It was fully expected that when the Dairy Board met yesterday, the meeting would discuss a notice of motion which had been tabled by Mr. J. R. Corrigan, to the effect that the resolutions already on the books of the Board in relation to price-fixing be rescinded. It was a surprise, therefore, when it was learned that this resolution was not discussed, but that a motion —w'hich amounted to something in the nature of a unanimously agreed to. - Explaining New Departure.

An amplified unofficial statement has also been made to the effect that the Board decided to instruct its London agency to call a meeting of all the importers of New Zealand butter and cheese, and invite them to elect a committee of throe merchants to confer with the London agency and manager, for the purpose of valuing butter and cheese for the time being. It is provided that if both producing members of the London Agency dissent from the opinion of the other members as to the price to be put on the produce of this joint committee. then it shall be left to the London agency to determine the value.

In the light of this position, a Wellington Press man sought the expressed opinion of ono who !* closely associated with the export of produce—and incidentally a producer—and who is recognised as an authority on the question. Ho stated last evening that it the present state of things existed for six months, there would bo a crash. “The trade simply cannot stand it,** he declared. ‘‘At the present time butter is at Is per lb.—back to the figure at which it was before the war—and advances on choose are reaching only 53d. The Board will have to take a step back; the further it pursues its present policy, the greatest will, bo that step, and incidentally the greater the detriment to the country. "It is evident from the cables which have been published In the papers recently that there is a groat deni of antagonism among the trade at Home to the Board. What is the logical result? The result is that Australia is up to us in price, Argentine and other countries arc following closely, and threatening to get better money for their produce, and the market is gradually but surely closing in around us. I repeat—and repeat with emphasis—that at the present rate there will be within six months a crash unprecedented in the history of the country."

It is this latter provision which is no doubt meant to explain the “certain safeguards for the protection of producers,” contained in the official statement. Such a belated arrangement is very much in the nature of the policy adopted by the London agency of the Australian Dairy Produce Board. According to this policy no attempt is made at price-fixing. The Committee is simply asked to decide from day to day whether they are prepared to soli their butter at the then ruling price. Whether the New Zealand Board is prepared to adopt this course in its entirety is rather doubtful. It evidently reserves to itself the right at all times to override the decisions of this joint committee if, in the opinion of the members of the Board, the action of the committee is not in tho interests of tho pi’Oduccr. Tho meetings of this joint, committee are to bo convened from time to time by the manager or two members of the joint committee. No time