MARKETING DAIRY PRODUCE

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXIII, Issue 19471, 29 October 1926, Page 10

MARKETING DAIRY PRODUCE

An important modification of the Dairy Produce Board s policy has been made by the decision to invite importers of New Zealand butter and cheese to co-operate with the board's London agency in "naming the selling prices of butter and cheese from time to time." By this resolution, the board has found a basis of. agreement among its mem bcrs, for the official report states that it was carried unanimously. The proposal is a substantial concession to the views of the dairy produce traders in England, and a declaration of that moderation in the use of its ' powers counselled by the Imperial Economic Committee. However far the board may have originally intended to go in the direction of "fixing" prices, its present intention is sufficiently modest to allay the apprehensions that have been expressed in England. It has even abandoned the obnoxious word, and now speaks only of the "naming" of prices by the joint committee of the board's agents and the traders' representa fives. This is apparently exactly the method developed by Denmark, copied by the Australian Board, and cordially commended by the Imperial Economic Committee. Its purpose is to set a standard, which will naturally be accommodated to the current market values; not to set a limit for which stocks will be held. By thus modifying its policy, the board has adopted half the Danish system —only half, because there is still no suggestion of relinquishing the absolute control of the marketing of all the export dairy produce. No such concentration into a single selling agency has been found necessary in Denmark. The price of Danish butter is "named" weekly by the Copenhagen committee of exporters and merchants, but the actual responsibility of marketing is divided among eleven co-operative associa tions, which handle 40 per cent, of the output, and merchants who deal with 35 per cent., the balance of 25 per cent, being sold direct from the factories to two British concerns. All are guided by the official quota tion, but none is bound by it. Having now decided to adopt the Danish system of regulating prices, as Australia has already done with satisfactory results, the board apparently proposes to maintain "absolute control" of the marketing. For what purpose? The official committee will "name" the price, probably weekly. The board will be the only seller. Will it sell at or about the official quotation to all bidders to the limit of its available stocks, or will it immediately set another price or restrict the volume of its sales ? By following either of the latter alternatives, it would stultify the official quotation. But if the system is to have its logical consequence of making all the available produce open to purchase at the official quotation, why should the board not allow the actual owners to manage the markets ing, as the Danish system does? It has made large concessions to trade and popular opinion in England ; it has still to meet the objections to its policy felt within New Zealand. Nowhere else in the world has a cooperative trading system been erected with compulsion as its keystone. In Denmark, in the United States and in Australia, support has been won by proving the success of the methods employed. The New Zealand board has wisely modified its attitude at the marketing end ; it has much to gain and nothing to lose by relinquishing control of produce that is brought into its hands only by statutory force.