Patea & Waverley Press WEDNESDAY, MARCH 30, 1927 DAIRY CONTROL BLUNDER.

Patea Mail, Volume XLIX, 30 March 1927, Page 2

Patea & Waverley Press WEDNESDAY, MARCH 30, 1927 DAIRY CONTROL BLUNDER.

|N view of the huge blunder committed by the Dairy Produce Control Board in attempting to i,x prices for the produce under its control there will be many who will consider Parliament will be lacking in its duty to the dairy larmors of the Dominion if it docs not call upon the members of the board to show cause tvhy the ooard'should not be abolished and its functions carried out by a , pceiai Department of the. Plate. The board cannot excuse itself on iho ground that it did not know duit its utilisation of the very full powers conferred on it would act disastrously, on the farmers of the Dominion, because it was warned again and again by the Imperial Economic Committee against the folly of price fixing. This committee, in its'very valuable, report on the marketing and preparing for market of foodstuffs within the Empire, has the following interesting remarks to make with regard to Control Boards. It says:—“To sum up, we recognise that the conditions of the United Kingdom market, where the irregular, arrival, of supplies leads to fluctuations in price, have justified ■ pceiai steps on the part of overseas producers to safeguard their interests. Such fluctuations in price have given the opportunity for speculation-to buyers and sellers, whose operations have magnified these iluctuations. The remedy is the regularisation of supplies, and, as .we have already pointed out, the stimulation of demand. Organised bodies with the object of regulating quantity and improving-quality have now come into existence,... In• Australia and New Zealand - they have been given statutory powers. There is a natural foai* among traders that bodies, enjoying wide statutory powers might- he attempted to abuse them. Should'they follow the policy of holding up supplies in the United Kingdom for reserved prices, which has been adopted by a certain number of New Zealand factories, they will be venturing upon the very dangerous experiment of massed speculation. If, on the other hand, they limit their activities to the regulation of shipments and the gradual development of orderly marketing in the United Kingdom by such methods as the quotation of prices lo “give a lead” to Hie market, they will greatly contribute to the stabilisation of the market, and will benefit both producers and consumers. We would therefore strongly urge upon these boards the policy of moderation in the use of their powers.” To lie strictly fair the fanners, whilst blaming the board for endeavouring to force up the price of butter and cheese, should remember they themselves have not been altogether guiltless in Ibis respect. The report already referred to states in another portion that ‘Hu conse-

queuce of the fact that a large portion of the New Zealand supplies has in recent years been regularly sold at the time when the lowest prices were ruling 1 , certain New Zealand factories have sent their butter to the United Kingdom with instructions that it must not be sold beloAv a certain price, and that it must be held in cold storage until the market price 1 rises to that level. In effect, this L means that the Now Zealand pro- : ducer in such cases has himself J been speculating in the United * Kingdom in the anticipation of £ the rise. Such a practice we can- 1 not too strongly condemn. We have already stated that if it is ! necessary to hold butter in cold storage as is undoubtedly the ! case if supplies arc to be regular- ! ised, the storage should, as far 1 as possible take place in the producing country, rather than in the United Kingdom.” Valuable advice is also given by the committee to the Control Board with re- 1 gard to the practice adopted by the Copenhagen Committee and the Australian Dairy Produce Control Board. These two bodies are not so foolish as to make any attempt at fixing definite prices for their produce, but instead hold weekly consultations with the importers, and at these joint sittings endeavour to give a ‘lead’ to the market in regard to the price of the produce to be sold. If the New Zealand Board had followed out this practice as suggested by the Imperial .Economic Committee it would have more than justified its' existence, and saved the dairy farmers of this country many thousands of pounds. The sound advice of the Economic Committee is contained n the following paragraph, which should have been' taken to heart and acted upon by the board. The paragraph staters: “Whilst we are definitely opposed to any attempt to * fix’ prices we think that from all the evidence hvc have heard much good may be done by the publication of a weekly ‘lead’ as a guidance to the market, and we think that in this matter the Control Boards cannot fail to render great service by co-operating with the traders who are doing the business.” From the foregoing it will be seen that the only persons to blame for the present unhappy stale of affairs with regard to the sale of the country’s dairy produce are the members of the Control Board and the 22,284 farmers who, instead of vetoing the proposal to bring the compulsory clauses of the Dairy Control Act into effect, voted in'favour of it.