KAITAIA REMIT TURNED DOWN

Northern Advocate, 25 June 1937, Page 7

KAITAIA REMIT TURNED DOWN

N.D.q. Satisfied With Committee Fixing Set Price [Special', to “Northern Advocate ”] HAMILTON, This Day. Little support was given at the National Dairy Conference yesterday to claims that an undemocratic method was adopted by the Government in determining the amount of the fixed payments for dairy produce. Advocating that, unless provision had already been made, the Government should be requested to include pn the committee nominees appointed by the conference, was a remit from the Kaitaia Co-operative Dairy Company, Ltd., which was the subject of lengthy discussion. Mr Parlane’s Amendment.

It was considered by Mr S. A. Ferguson (Norfolk) that the industry should have the right to appoint its own representatives to confer with the Government in the fixation of the price. Buyers and sellers should be entitled to appoint an equal number to any committee which arranged the amount of the payment. Mr C. J. Parlane, general manager of the New Zealand Co-oper-ative Daily Company, moved an amendment that the Government should be urged to set up an inde--1 pendent tribunal, with a Supreme Court judge as president, to determine the price the Government paid for the produce it purchased. He said it did not seem right that the Government should be the purchaser of butter and cheese and, at the same time, determine the price to be paid for it. If the fixation were undertaken by an .independent body, neither party would be in a worse position. . Every Assistance for Committee. It was pointed out by Mr A. J. Sinclair, secretary-manager of the Te Awarautu Co-operative Dairy Company, and a member of the Guaranteed Price Committee, that, with only one exception, members of the committee were well known as opponents of the Government. He said that any information he had, sought had been readily given. They had obtained the Government Statistician’s and the Government Farm Economist’s ser-

vices, and any further matter they had required had been placed before them with willingness and expedition. Several meetings had been held by a sub-committee which was set up to consider the details of the proposals, and that committee would get down to solid work on July 2. The full committee would meet about the middle of July. Motions Defeated. Mr Sinclair said he believed , that the Government was actuated by a genuine desire to appoint men representative of various aspects of the industry. He thought they would not get very far if they introduced these extreme suggestions, and he failed to see that a Supreme Court judge could adjudicate better than the present committeemen.

The remit and the amendment were both lost by a large majority.