Manawatu Daily Times Doubtful Methods

Manawatu Times, Volume XLIX, Issue 3496, 4 November 1926, Page 8

Manawatu Daily Times Doubtful Methods

The latest developments in dairy produce control exposed by the startling statements made by Mr. Timpany (the Southland representative of the Board), are causing grave concern because of the loss of prestige and goodwill of New Zealand dairy produce on tie London market The centre of criticism appears to have,, shifted to the Auckland province, where the two city papers administered a severe editorial castigation to tire Board, both as to the policy pursued and the doubtful methods employed by those responsible for the administration of the Board’s affairs.

It is freely admitted that a most serious blunder was made when Mr. J. B. Wright was appointed London manager of the New Zealand Dairy Produce Board. Previous to taking over his new duties he had been in sole command of the New Zealand Co-opera-tive Dairy Company’s dairy produce in London. Long before being appointed by the Board, it was well-known that, partly owing to methods characteristic of the management of the Waikato company, and partly to reasons of a more personal nature, Mr. Wright was anything but popular in Tooley Street. Of this fact the Board was fully cognisant, and Mr. Wright’s appointment was made in defiance of the men who virtually hold the New Zealand dairy industry in Uic hollow of their hands.

The importance of the London trade’s objection to Mr. Wright cannot be exaggerated. It is admitted, of course, that the British dairy produce market, as a whole, is far from satisfactory. But the treatment meted out to New Zealand butter, compared with foreign supplies, leaves not a shadow of doubt, that our produce is paying the penalty of unpopularity. Mr. Coates’s and Mr. Stronach Paterson’s cables made it perfectly clear that the centre of contention, as far as the British wholesale trade is concerned, is the Board’s London manager. The Prime Minister urges immediate action. Mr. Paterson speaks of disaster. Both strongly recommend a change of management, and although Mr. Forsyth stated at Stratford on luesday that Mr. Wright’s resignation had practically been in the hands of the Board, the Board declined to take action.

The deadlock, therefore, is apparently to continue. In spite of repeated assurances to the contrary the .New Zealand Boaxd is fax from a happy family. In London Messrs. Grounds and Motion on the one hand and Messrs, lorns and Paterson on the other, arc carrying on a gymkhana, with Toolcy Street merchants as interested spectators. The worst that could happen is for the retail trade to take up the conflict and influence the consumers against New Zealand butter and cheese. Even a partial boycott of our dairy produce on the British market might mean disaster to the New Zealand dairy industry, resulting as it undoubtedly would, in irreparable losses to the producers.

It, is evident that immediate action is imperative. Nothing is gained by arguing the rights or wrongs of the situation. Mr. Wright may bo a most estimable gentleman, but what business man would retain the services of an unpopular salesman and force his presence on his best customers? As the “New Zealand Herald” puts it, what is done must bo done quickly. “Delay means further loss to men who cannot afford it anti must bo not be allowed to incur it. If the position is not rectified, the Board will have to face a day of reckoning, and should ho made to answer to the full. No more temporising, such as is revealed by to-day’s disclosures, can be permitted to menace the livelihood of those whose well-being is in the hands of the Dairy Produce Board.”

Apart from the position in London, Iho Wellington Board’s methods of handling the situation arc Jiving severely criticised in certain quarters. Mr. Paterson’s cable, which was sent from London on October 23, was not placed before the last Board's meeting on October 27, while the contents of Mr. Coates’s cable were only disclosed after Mr. Corrigan had been induced to withdrawn his notice of motion re price fixation. A somewhat similar incident occurred at the last public meeting of dairy-farmers, when Mr. lorns’ London cable, urging the retention of the individual vote, was not read until the Conference had decided in favour of the factory vote. Such methods are not worthy of an organisation in whose hands has been placed the safe-keeping of New Zealand’s most important industry.