Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

THE MEAT PRODUCERS’ BOARD

TO THE EDITOR. g lß —Various writers and speakers have criticised the Meat Producers Board in general terms without making any specific charge as to the direction in which its actions have been wrong, ihe board does not object to criticism, but would like critics to be constructive. Mr Chapman does bring a specific cnarge against the board —that it did not interfere when the lamb buyers gave Id per lb less for lambs over 361 b weight. Surely Mr Chapman does not think that the Meat Board, whatever its personnel may be, could fix the price of lamb, and as for making a vigorous protest, it is difficult to see what useful purpose that would serve. The' board has seen to it that the door is kept open for any farmer to ship his own lambs, if he considers the price offercu locally is not a reasonable one. Most farmers prefer to sell locally if possible and get paid promptly, but they can hardly expect the lamb buyer to take a risk that they are not prepared to take The sheep farmers must decide what men they wish to represent them on the board, and, in doing so, should have clearly in their minds what they wish the board to do. The board is anxious to know what is in the minds of the farmers. It is acting in their interests to the best of its ability. It cannot dictate prices, but it can and does keep the path open from the farm to the British buyer. The method of election may or may not be the best method, but it has at least the advantage of getting together at the annual meeting a representative group of farmers, to whom it is answerable for its actions, or inaction, during the year and who can there and then record their approval, or by their votes alter the personnel of the board. “ Deep-seated dissatisfaction, Dominionwide,” can easily be expressed at the coming election. As a member of the board I am indebted to Mr Chapman for having been more definite in his complaint than most of the critics of the board. I fear that the only effective interference on its part would be to offer a higher price than the other buyers, and this it would not be justified in doing. The board has on occasions bought quantities of lambs in order to try to open up new markets, but this is as far as it feels justified in going in the purchase of meat. —I am, etc., James Bego.

This article text was automatically generated and may include errors. View the full page to see article in its original form.
Permanent link to this item

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/ODT19330804.2.33.18

Bibliographic details

Otago Daily Times, Issue 22023, 4 August 1933, Page 7

Word Count
433

THE MEAT PRODUCERS’ BOARD Otago Daily Times, Issue 22023, 4 August 1933, Page 7

THE MEAT PRODUCERS’ BOARD Otago Daily Times, Issue 22023, 4 August 1933, Page 7