Honey Control Through Government Department Subjected to Criticism

Otago Daily Times, Issue 26916, 30 October 1948, Page 7

Honey Control Through Government Department Subjected to Criticism

P.A. WELLINGTON, Oct. 29. 'Urgency was taken for the passing of the Imprest Supply Bill No. 5 in the House of Representatives to-day. The Opposition chose as the subject of debate the honey industry, which Mr W. J. Broadfoot (Oppn., Waitomo), in opening the discussion, described as one of the smaller branches of primary industry which was, however, of great value. Too little attention had been paid to it in the past. He criticised the marketing of the product and made a plea for the industry to be allowed to control its own affairs as did the dairy industry. Control through the Internal Marketing Division had been unsatisfactory to the. producers, said Mr Broadfoot.

The Minister of Marketing, Mr Cullen, said the honey marketing regulations were agreed to by the Honey Control Board, by the Beekeepers’ Association (the producers’ organisation), and by the Honey Suppliers’ Association. The 151 tons of honey the Internal Marketing Division received last season was less than the producers had promised, but it was known that some producers were selling quantities of honey privately at prices far above the fixed rates. This was virtually a black market, and the prices were certainly black. The Shortage of honey in New Zealand in the last year or two had been largely due to the fact that people now sought honey who formerly could not afford it. Mr Cullen said that producers who had sold their supplies to the Internal Marketing Division were satisfied. The Internal Marketing Division had nothing for which to apologise, and had come to the rescue of the industry. The division was prepared to co-operate with the industry. Mr C. G. Harker (Oppn., Hawke’s Bay) said that if willingness to cooperate rather than to dictate was shown, and if co-operative marketing was encouraged, then much of the beekeepers’ dissatisfaction would be removed and more honey would be made available at a cheaper price. Mr J. R. Hanan (Oppn., Invercargill) said the regulations and controls which bound the industry had not allowed the normal progress that would follow under a free market. Mr H. E. Combs (Govt., Onslow) said that if the beekeepers received from the Internal Marketing Division a price which covered all outgoings, then the beekeepers would be doing well. If the Internal Marketing Division price was too low it was open to them to approach the organisation and their board to see if the price could not be varied to the advantage of the industry and the beekeepers in particular. The total honey production last season was 4700 tons, of which 151 tons, or 3 per cent., was handled by the Internal Marketing Division, which was an indication that the department was not wanted by the honey producers, said Mr W. A. Sheat (Oppn., Patea).

Mr W. A. Bodkin (Oppn., Central Otago) said the debate exploded the theory that a department under a Socialist regime could bring anything but confusion worse confounded into anything it undertook. After a brief reply by the Acting Prime Minister, Mr Nash, the Bill was given a second reading, put through the committee stages promptly and passed, 'giving one month’s supply, amounting to £15,193,000.