THE BATTLE CONTINUES

New Zealand Times, Volume LIII, Issue 12434, 30 April 1926, Page 9

THE BATTLE CONTINUES

PRIME MINISTER DEPUTATIONISED BY OPPOSING FORCES

DAIRY CONTROL DISPUTE

MR COATES STATES CABINET WILL CONSIDER REPRESENTATIONS

The dairy control battle was continued in Wellington yesterday, when both sides appealed to.the Prime Minister, who had associated with him when he received the deputations the Minister for Agriculture. Neither Mr Coates nor Mr Hawken made committal replies, and, in effect, they informed those who had waited on them that Cabinet would consider the representations which had been made, would guarantee fair play, and would introduce legislation in Parliament.

MR GROUNDS AND HIS MEN The first deputation, which was received in the morning, was of representatives of the conference which had supported the absolute control policy of the board. It wae introduced by Mr I 4 '. Waite, M.P. (Chitlin), who said the to be placed Oefore the Prime Minister were the outcome of *he largest and most representative meeting of dairying interests—both butter and cheese—ever held in the Dominion, which had taken place at Wellington on the previous day. Mr William Grounds, Chairman of tho Dairy Control Board, explained briefly the work accomplished by the conference, fiom which a section of the representatives had retired. In the, first place, from figures that had been roughly calculated, it was judged that the conference had represented 60,000 tons of butter and a similar tonnage of cheese, and after the dissentients had retired, it was gauged that those left Jn the hall represented 54,000 tons of cheese and 49,000 tons of butter. The voting at the conference had been conducted upon the export tonnage basis in the interests of the cheese people, and owing to the fact that many small suppliers merely produced for local requirements, and contributed little or nothing towards the support of the boxwd.

have to get his legislative proposals ready for Cabinet, and legislation would be submitted in the direction which ’ the deputation suggested. Whether Parliament would_ agree to the legislation which would be submitted, he was unable to say. If the farming community desired to handle their concern within the meaning of the Act, and they were sufficiently unanimous, it seemed to him that that was their business. All he could ask them to do was use ordinary commercial judgment and commercial practice which would be perfectly fair to all concerned. The deputation had mentioned the Welfare League and other concerns. Well, this was a free country, and everyone was entitled to express an opinion; these discussions might do good, though they might be a little annoying at .times. He could not see any harm in people expressing their views, even if those people were interested. As far as the Government was concerned, the legislation was there, and they asked that commercial judgment should be used in whatever was done, and that an endeavour should he made to see that the community did not suffer by any action , that might be taken. The Government had had an opinion from the Dairy Board, and was asking for more. They might have no right to ask for this, but as a Government they were concerned regarding anything that might -be done which would prejudice the sale of produce, and thereby affect New Zealand. They were getting this lnformuA ion to make perfectly sure that nothing extraordinary 1 was being done, but that ordinary business practice was being followed. He understood that another deputation was coming to see him, and the representations of that deputation, too, would be considered. Trie Government’s attitude was quite clear; the legislation was there, and it was the business of the farmers ■to handle the undertaking if they wished to. Mr T. O. Brash: The present legislation makes it neoessflry to postpone any further election till August. Is the amended legislation likely to be ready by that time? Mr Coates said that some legislation bad been drafted, and if it had been passed it would have saved this trouble. As to Mr Brash’s question, he could not give an answer. He had not heard of any further legislation the board or the producers - had asked for in this direction, except as regarded the award*system. OTHER SIDE ARRIVES IN FORCE In the afternoon a deputation of 84 delegates, representing the dissatisfied section of the previous day’s conference waited on the Prime Minister and Mr Hawken. This deputation was introduced by Mr W. A. Veitch, M.P., who presented the case in the following form: — 1. When the Dairy Conference was first called by Mr Grounds, he issued a cir6ular to the industry stating that the conference would appoint its own chairman, and • decide for itself the method of voting at the conference. This was only right and proper. At a later date Mr -Grounds issued a second circular stating that he would bo chairman of the conference, and that the voting at the conference would be on a tonnage basis. It was obvious that any such method of voting would not reflect the views of the industry. 2. When the rolf was called it was ascertained that there were 357 factories represented at the conference. It was the largest meeting of the whole industry that had over been held, and represented approximately 50,000 suppliers. 3. As a body we knew that we represented 43 per cent, of those suppliers, and yet on tho unfair tonnage basis of voting at the conference we only carried 28 per cent, of the voting strength of the conference.

Mr Grounds then explained the resolutions which had been passed at the conference, explaining the basis upon which it was desired that the voting be taken, the voting power of the larger companies to be diminished. The policy of compulsory control, which was to be employed in August next, had also been endorsed unanimously by the conference.

Hon. J. B. Gow stressed as the most vital point the voting on the tonnage basis, and declared that only upon these lines could the equities of the case l>e met Any other system would run itself into grave inequalities. From the commercial aspect, too, the basis was sound, and he appealed to anyone who had been connected with business to analyse the position. Making allowance for those who had left the conference on the previous day, it was estimated that—even if the whole of them had been unanimous—there would still have been a two to one majority vote in favour of the exj>ort tonnage basis of voting. So on the matter of principle, the conference had s>poken in no uncertain manner. “We Tegret that a certain section did not wait and give their views on the questions at the conference,’* he went*on, “but even if they had, and with due consideration of the figures before us, in np, single instance would the decision of ofche conference have been different. 1 I think this will be borne out.’’

W. R. Lowry, vftio represented the cheese interests, stated that if the voting was not on the tonnage basis the cheese men would be outvoted by those butter. It had been found to be the invariable rule that, so far as'the securing the company’s vote was concerned, the invariable experience had bee# that the suppliers left things in the-hands of the directors. “Unless you go along with a bonus J n P oc : kefc > and advertise this fact, he said, “the suppliers will not attend the meetings.” A WORD FROM MR HAWKEN The Hon. O. Hawken, Minister for Agriculture, said the work the members of the deputation had been doing was quite important and he expressed regret that Wednesday s meeting had not continued as a whole instead of splitting into two meetings, because there were one or two matters on which he and others would have liked' to see a vote of the whole of those present. Unfortunately, by walking out a section of the delegates prevented the obtaining that very clear expression of opinion that was desired. He sympathised with the idea that the export tonnage should in some way be considered. He knew that a great many who now had a right to vote were not really dairymen at all; they had merely two or three cows as a side line, and at present they had as good a vote as the man whoso all was in the business. The deputation’s representations would be. taken into consideration. The main point concerned the voting. He wished the conference had held together, because they hardly knew how things would have gone had that happened. certainly thought there was a majority in favour of the directors having the vote, hut at the same time there was a big division of opinion. Mr Waite said the opinion was two to one in favour of tho line advocated by the present ‘deputation. Mr Hawken: Of those who remained?

4. In the first place we challenged the chair purely on the question of principle. Mr Grounds refused to accept any motion along these lines, or to submit the matter to a vote at the conference. When he was asked why he bail changed his first method of leaving tho conference to fix its own chairman and method of voting, he threw the responsibility for his change of tactics on the Minister for Agriculture. It is for the Minister for Agriculture to say whether he accepts the responsibility or not. THE QUESTION OF ELECTION 5. The first division of the conference arose on the question of electing the members of the hoard on the democratic principle of one producer one vote. Wo objected to the conference voting on this question on a tonnage basis, and when Mr Grounds refused to accept any motion determining tho system of voting at the conference we withdrew in a body and established a conference of our own in a separate building. 6. Our conference consisted of 86 representatives from 113 factories, comprising 21,264 tons butter, 11,693 tone choose, and 21,688 suppliers; or in other words, 43 per cent, oif the suppliers wiio wero represented in Wellington. 7. Wo passed the following resolution: —‘‘That, this meeting of representatives of dairy companies expresses its emphatic desire that the members of tho Dairy Control Board be elected on the single ward system, six wards for the North Island and three wards for tho South Island, one producer to one vote.” 8. The delegates who remained nt the Town Hall, represented 57 per cent, of the suppliers, but it was not long beforo they camo to loggerheads amongst themselves ori the question of the individual supplier’s vote, and a division was taken. The details of the voting of the .division on a suppliers’ basis are not yet available, but a verylarge section was strongly in favour of the voting being loft in the hands of tho individual suppliers. Others again admitted that the principle of the producers exercising an individual vote was right and proper hut difficult to carry out in practice. It is evident, therefore, that delegates to Wellington representing at. least 70 per cent, of tho suppliers of the Dominion were in favour of the individual producer exercising his vote for members o-f the board. Our section, represent-

• Waite: No. of the whole. Mr Hawken: Did you take a vote on the main question of the individual voting for the hoard? Mr Grounds: That was struck out nf the original resolution by 773 to 30.

Mr Hawken : I am satisfied that you yourself knew your own minds. I don’t know about those who left. There has been a great deal of unnecessary agitation in regard to this control matter, •j Beems me that there are outsiders, and those not directly intcres*od in the dairy business who are interfering. The position is somewhat complicated I admit, but T feet sure that after yesterday’s meeting the position will be cleared up, and we will he able to judge what is best to be clone regarding legislation. THE PRIME MINISTER r T ,l le ,? rime Minister, the Bight Hon. 4. U. Coates, said he thought the position was a simple one. The deputation was asking for legislation for the ward system on a certain basis; for the members of the Dairy Board to be elected by fhp directorates of tbe factories, and tlie voting to Be on an export tonnage basis. He did not pretend to be clear on the whole of the points, but bo was clear as regarded the position respecting cheese and butter. Legislation would be considered. The Altor- - wouW h* asked to draft it. I he Minister for Agriculture would

ing 43 per cent, of the suppliers, stands for the principle of one producer one vote; at least another 30 per cent, strongly in favour of individual suppliers exercising their vote hut on a different basis; while the remaining delegates, representing not more than 25 per cent, of the suppliers are in favour of factory directors electing the board. A CABLE FROM HOME 9. In spite of the foregoing, Mr Grounds has to-day presented you with a resolution asking for legislation for individual factory directors to-elect the Control Board on a tonnage basis. 10. Mr Grounds received early in the morning a cable from Mr Irons, one of the hoard’s representatives in London, but it was not read to the conference until late in tho afternoon: “Consder it advisable retain direct individual producers’ vote for candidates on ward system to retain producers interest in board.” 11. We maintain that individual suppliers must bo allowed to exercse their vote for their own representative on the Control Board and .that there is only one sound and democratic method of voting, namely, one producer, one vote. « Mr W. D. Mason, who represented the South Island section of the Free Marketing League, said he heartily supported the one-man, <me-vote system, the single ward allocation, the whole of the. Dominion to ho divided into nine wards for. the election of members of the board. Mr James Hine (Tikarangi), who also represented the Free Marketing League, added his support to tlie remarks of Mb Veitch, and expressed regret that some of* the delegates had been compelled to take such a drastic step on the previous day. DICTATION RESENTED The Prime Minister: Was that a dignified retreat? (Laughter.) Mr Hine: I think so. Hie step was taken owing to the dictatorial manner in which trie Dairy Board had laid dawn the procedure of the conference. We considered that we had the right which the chairman of the board had himself previously expressed himself in favour of —self-determination. We felt that we could not remain and barter away the rights of the individual producer on the tonnage basis, upon which tho voting at the conference was being taken. Seeing that Parliament has almost unanimously decided in favour of tlie individual supplier having the individual single vote, we feel that wo can safely leave the matter in your hands. Mr Balmer (Manawatu) assured tho Prime Minister that his executive was wholeheartedly behind the interests of the deputation—one man. one vote. The Prime Minister: Whether a man ie milking one cow or thirty? Mr Balmer: It makes no difference He might be milking thirty next year, or he might be milking only ono. Afte rMr Boyce (Manawatu) had spoken. Air Veitch explained that the deputation was not there to discuss tho policy of the board, but to ask that all producers should have an equal opportunity of saying who should bo the members of the hoard. The Prime Alinister: There are two points—the ward system and the method of election. Are you agreed upon the ward system P Air Veitch explained that it was desired that the supplier should have the vote independently of the factory director. The Prime Alinister: And leave out tho company? Air Veitch: There is no reason why the matter should not lie arranged through tlie dairy companies. Mr D. Hurley (Hurleyville)They

decided this point at the conference yesterday. The Prime Minister: Why didn’t you stop and vote? GRAVE DANGERS MIGHT ARISE Air Hine: Grave dangers might arise if the directors have the voting in their hands. The suppliers would like to have the vote themselves. Mr Coates: Are these men here directors of companies? Mr Veitch: Alostly chairman of directors, and representatives of companies. Mr Coates: Is there anyone here representing just the suppliers? Vcjjces: Yes, one or two. - , Tlie Alinister for Agriculture (Hon. O. Hawken): In respect to the tonnage basis of voting, if a company had say, 100 tons, and another had only ten tons, would not the suppliers follow in the same ratio? A member of the deputation: No, I know one chairman of directors, who voted in favour of the tonnage system, and his suppliers are all . in favour of the individual vote. Another member: Yes, and there are dozens of others who did the same .yesterday. Tho Alinister for Agriculture: Are there not so many suppliers to each ton of produce ? Air Veitch: No. Colonel Hall explained that upon the tonnage basis there were 1115 votes nt the conference, hut if this had been assesse'd upon the number of suppliers there would have been only 800 votes. As it' was eight of tlie companies in the hall possessed an equal vote to the 113 companies whose representatives walked out. The eight companies represented 9000 suppliers, and the 113 companies represented 21.000 suppliers. The Alinister for Agriculture: Then you do not represent the export busii ness? Air Veitch: Yes, we represent the smaller’ co-operative factories in the Dominion. The Minister: But do you not just produce for local requirements? Air H. Bond (Rangiotu): Ninety-five per cent, of my produce is oxport. Mr Hine: If the voting is the same wvlfi tho supplier, why not let the suppliers have it? Tho Alinister: If it is the same, why do you protest? MR HAWKEN CONSIDERS VOTING AT CONFERENCE FAIR

Air Hine: Because Parliament has laid this down, and has established a precedent. Hie Alinister explained that in order to have a workable meeting some procedure must bo laid down, for the individual supplier could not attend the meeting in force. It was there foie decided to continue upon the procedure which tho industry itself had decided in 1923, and the Alinister thought this was quite a fair one. "1 took the procedure of the industry,” he said. Air Hine: Hiat was as to the voting at tho conference. Tho Alinister: I consider that the voting system at the conference was quite fair. The proprietary, concerns have large numbers of suppliers who contribute only a small amount of produce. Hioro would be any amount of these people getting a vote when thev were only milking one or two cows. I know that, for this reason the figures that are given to the public arc hard to explain. Colonel Hall: But should Ibe deprived of voting for you if I only had whcre.ns my neighbour had more? Hie Alinister: That has nothing to do with it. .

In discussing the question of the directors having tho vote lor their fac-

tories, the Prime Alinister stated that it would not matter what the voting power was,' so long as authority was given the directors by the suppliers to veto for them. MR COATES ON LEGISLATION Mr Coates said that a point was that as far as he could see both sides were agreeable to the ward system. He was there not to comment on what they had to say but to listen to their representations. The Government had made no commitment as to a basis of voting. After the reprerentations of those concerned had been heard, legislation would he submitted to Parliament. He was going to say something that perhaps he should not say; it might mean votes, but he did not care. He would far rather have seen them stick to their guns on Wednesday, and see the meeting through, instead of making a dignified retreat. The representations of both parties would be considered, and at the moment he would not say which the Government was going to follow. Cabinet had the final say before the legislation went before Parliament, but Parliament had what really was the final say. He was not there to raise difficulties, but to see if they could be overcome. Air Veitch: We are satisfied with a promise from you that the whole matter will receive tho careful consideration of the Government, and that yon will do your best to give us all fair Play. Air Coates: Oh, wo will guarantee you fair play, whether you think it fair or not. Mr Hawken: Does the deputation think the present representation on the hoard fairly represents the wards as they would he placed under any system that we might devise ? Voices: No. Air Veitch: It is very difficult to answer that. Air Hine: Whatever we might think of the board individually we recognise that when they drew up that ticket they divided the candidates equally through the North Island, geographically speaking. Air Hawken: I think it is fairly representative. Mr J. Sinclair: We are anxious to know whether the Arinister gave definite instructions to the Dairy Control Board that the voting at the conference was to ho on the tonnage basis. Air Hawken: I simply told them t-i follow the precedent in the industry.