DAIRY PRODUCE CONTROL.

Otago Daily Times, Issue 19760, 10 April 1926, Page 8

DAIRY PRODUCE CONTROL.

TO THE EDITOR. Sir, —The impartial attitude adopted by your journal in connection with the much-debated question of a moderate measure of control versus absolute c t\trol must naturally enhance the value of your criticism of the extraordinary assumption of power by the Dairy Control Board in connection with the proposed conference called by the board in Wellington on April 28. In the power, so arrogantly assumed by the board, to dictate the basis of voting at the said conference we have a startling example of “ the never-ending audacity of the elected person, and a conspicuous illustration of the saying; “A State within a State.” Parliament, in setting up a precedent unparalleled in the history of parliamentary legislation by depriving the dairy farmer at the bidding of a minority, of an open market for the sale of his produce, gave him, at the same time, a vote to enable him to choose, if possible, the most trustworthy and efficient person known to him to be his direct and personally elected representative on the Dairy Export Control Board to safeguard his interests. Fond delusion! For now, per circular No. 53, issued to dairy factories by the Control Board (I enclose circular for you- perusal, Sir), the board informs us that it intends to override the authority of Parliament and the established law by depriving the producer of his vote on the question of electing the board (the object of the conference) and substituting therefor voting on a tonnage basis, the vote to be exercised by delegates appointed by factories only. That means that thousa; Is of non-shareholding dairy farmers will be effectively gagged and deprived of a voice in this alleged conference of dairyfarmers, whilst thousands of shareholding suppliers who favour smaller wards and the individual vote will also be unrepresented and unheard unless their company directors, elected for quite other reasons, chance to think on this question as they do. And yet the board informs us the primary reason for the conference is to make a recommendation to the Government ” as to the best method of electing the board. With a partisan for chairman and, obviously, a deliberately “ packed ” conference, what real value can be attached to such recommendations? Absolutely none. That the conference will recommend the tonnage basis voting power exercised by directors only, with the “council system of electing the board,” is a foregone conclusion. I told the Prime Minister in Wellington nine months ago that the “ tonnage basis and council system” was the boards policy. The Hon. Mr Hawken assured the deputation that 1 was mistaken. Today the board is advocating this policy from every platform. That proves that even honest members of the board can be deceived. The only way to settle the question of the best method of electing the board, and the still more important question of a free market, is by a direct referendum vote of dairy farmers, whose vita! interests are at stake. No Parliament, no Minister, with any sense of responsibility, would assist or connive at any attempt to deprive the dairy farmer of his direct control of the election of the board or of his inherent unquestionable right to dispose of his produce on the same equitable terms and under the same just law that applies to the rest of the producers of this Dominion. —I am. etc., W. D. Mason. Middlcmarch, April 8.