STATE MARKETING

Nelson Evening Mail, Volume 78, 25 June 1943, Page 4

STATE MARKETING

DEPARTMENT CRITICISED METHOD OF HANDLING PROD! CE (From Our Parliamentary Reporter > Wellington. This Day Criticism of the State Marketing Department was voiced in the House of Representatives last night by Mi W. J. Broadfoot (Nat. Waitomo) when speaking in the Budget Debate. He had alwaya understood that State monopolies were created to bring to the people goods and ser vices at minimum cost with maxi mum quality. The idea was that there should be no profit and no loss —just service to the community The Marketing Department to-day he found was using monopolistic methods and abusing its powers Produce was taken at the depart ment’s own price and there was no right of appeal and it was sold a* the department’s own price and again there was no right of appeal In addition, levies were imposed in all directions. Mr Broadfoot warned New Zealand meatgrowers to keep an eye on the meat pool account, wth a view to seeing that the money was not whisked over to the War Expenses Account. Credits held by the Marketing Department aggregated £1,670,000. and he wondered whether the Minister would ha\e the temerity or audacity to handle this money on lines similar to the handling of the producers’ wool. The Government was not justified in Yvithholding those credits from the farmers and primary producers. Marketing legislation was drawn on lines similar to method.*used in Russia for handling commodities. They took over produce at prices beloYV parity, selling to the consumer iat prices above parity. Russia had collected half its revenue in that way and if the Minister of Marketing were following in the footsteps of Russia, as the springs of taxation dried up he thought he would use the Marketing Department and other departments to gain revenue for the State in an unfair manner. Mr Broadfoot characterised it as bidder taxation.