DAIRY BOARD

Southland Times, Issue 25306, 8 June 1935, Page 6

DAIRY BOARD

OUTLINE OF WORK ADDRESS BY, THE CHAIRMAN WARD CONFERENCE The many difficulties confronting the dairy industry of New Zealand and the manner in which the newly-elected board hoped to handle its heavy responsibilities were subjects of discussion yesterday at the annual Southland ward conference of dairy factory directors and others interested The southern member of the hoaid (Mr John Dunlop) presided over a large attendance and associated with him on the platform were the chairman ot the board (Mr A. J. Murdoch, M.P., who delivered the mam address), Mesters W. E. Hale and C. A. Marchant (members) and Mr T. C. Brash (secretary to the board). At the conelusion, questions were invited and an informal discussion on matters affecting the industry ensued. . In his opening remarks the chairman, after introducing Messrs Murdoch, Hale and Marchant, referred to the question of the members honorarium. The sum of £3OO had been fixed by the board as a fair remuneration but the Government thought tne rise from £250 to £3OO was ill-advised and had asked the board to reconsider the matter. The area under the new constitution of the board was much larger for each member. Mr Dunlop said that, having regard to the labours of the board members, he agreed that £3OO was a fair figure. (Hear, hear.) ‘The amount had been reduced to £250 and itwas decided to again consider the honorarium later, but, quite frankly, he would favour the £3OO it, at the later date, he personally thought the rise was justified. In reply to Mr T. Major, the chaiiman said that those present would be afforded the opportunity of discussing the question at a later stage of the meeting. Mr Murdoch’s Address. Mr Murdoch said that in the first place on behalf of the board he would like to express pleasure at meeting such a fine gathering. He would also like to say that Messrs Hale and Marchant had come only to Dunedin on board business. From Dunedin to Invercargill and back they were paying thenown expenses. The members had come to Christchurch and Dunedin on board business, local marketing. It had been said there was no need for the members to visit those centres to get information. They had been told they could get the evidence on the question tendered to the Daily Commission, but that was not so. That evidence had been given in confidence and the commissioner was “sitting on it. it was up to the members of the Dairy Board to get the information. The old board had been in existence for eleven years and had been adversely criticized If the members of that board had made mistakes they had done their best according to their lights and they were only human. The new board might make mistakes. Also during the term the old board was in existence the output had increased from 127,000 tons to 237,000 tons. ■, That must have increased the work of the staff and given anxiety to the board. It was not generally known that one of the last acts of the old board had been to get a 20 per cent, reduction in insurance premiums on prodl Mr Murdoch said the new board had been constituted as the result of the sitting of the Dairy Commission. The commission itself had been constituted as the result of an appeal for an investigation into the industry. The commission had included a • representative of the producers in the chairman of the late board, Mr W. A. lorns, who. was a producer himself. It had been said tljat on the new board the producers had been disfranchised as the result of the Act constituting the new board. The producers’ representatives on the board had been elected by the factory directors on a tonnage basis, but the directors in turn were elected by the suppliers and it was up to the latter to elect the best men. If the suppliers elected good directors they should have confidence in them. Under the old method of direct election only 40 per cent, of the votes were recorded, so that was not satisfactory. Besides the new board there was the Executive Commission of Agriculture, and that commission of three was a new idea. In some quarters it had been said that the commission had been set up to give the Government control of the industry. A Co-ordinating Body. “I think we can answer that point, too,” continued the speaker. “The Executive Council was set up for the purpose of co-ordinating the work of the several boards already established in New Zealand—meat, fruit and dairy boards. At present there is no wool board, but, if that body is constituted, then it will come under the jurisdiction of the Executive Council which, as a co-ordinating body, would control it.” Proceeding, Mr Murdoch explained that when overseas agreements had to be effected that could be done through the council, to which body the Dairy Board could make its recommendations. The council was there to co-ordinate, and in his opinion a reasonable view of its worth would be that the members were appointed to try to place the Dominion’s fruit, meat and produce abroad. That would simplify the Dairy Board’s arrangements and might be the means of extending markets. If the industry was to succeed it was essential that the executive, the Dairy Board and the Dairy Division of the Department of Agriculture should all work in harmony. Present conditions indicated that the board would have the fullest co-operation of the Dairy Division and he assured those present that there had been no hitches whatever and that the executive council would not operate in any way that, might militate against the board’s activities. The. Government did not .wish to be put in the position of taking over the dairy business: it wanted the industry to carry on its own business. Mr Murdoch said that if the board found certain works would have to be undertaken, it might be necessary to 1 obtain authority to do them, as, for example, the zoning of industries or a break in the system operating where a man sent to one factory and desired to go to another. If the board desired to regulate such matters it would have to seek the necessary order4n-Coun-cil from the executive body. The. council arranged the order and, if Parlia- ' ment were not in session at the time, the Government itself might issue the order. Then when Parliament later met, the matter would come before it for ratification. The order might be either accepted or rejected. Local Marketing. One of the main questions to be seriously considered by the board was that of local marketing, continued Mr Murdoch, who said that at the present time the controlling body was investigating the local marketing of butter The problems in Christchurch and Dunedin had been explained to the members on their southern visit and the board would have to consider the local marketing of cheese, too. Latex• it •would have to tackle the zoning ques-

tion. It had been found that producers were putting their produce on the market, but were losing considerable sums of money because one particular, factory might be under-cutting in its endeavour to get its produce on the market, Under the present system no particular company could really be blamed for that action. Again, it had been ascertained that certain shops were buying butter at lltd. a pound and selling it.at lid., provided 2/6 worth of goods was purchased at the same time. The board- considered that every article of the produce of the dairy fanner should, if of equal standard, be worth the same value on the local market. It was desired to remedy the undercutting and make the regulations watertight. In the course of the boards peregrinations, the members, too, had noticed considerable overlapping—some factories were running into one another and carts were travelling along the same route.' “We want to eliminate all superflous costs,” emphasized Mr Murdoch. “We should work as much as we can in unison, as, for instance, by amalgamating the small factories, and by eliminating every unnecessary cost. The board at the present time is not concerning itself with the elimination of the factories. The directors of the various factories have just as much insight as we and, if they would get. together and discuss the matter rationally, friendly relations might result and better prices be given to the producers. . , The board also intended investigating zoning matters and its suggestion would be that some voluntary arrangement—without the element of compulsion being introduced—would result in improved workable conditions. The zoning system had to be tackled and circulars had been sent out to factories concerned seeking suggestions in the matter. “Your produce here is mostly cheese; with us in the north it is mostly butter,” said Mr Murdoch. “Now you people have, therefore, a direct interest in cheese. We, as a board, however, cannot tell you how to remedy the evils (if any) in the cheese.” The chairman: We have good cheese down here. Hastening Slowly. Mr Murdoch said that on the board there were three old members, Messrs lorns, Agar and Dunlop. They would see it would take a little time to obtain a grip of affairs, and he objected to being forced to rush his fences. As dairymen they did not like rushing into anything and pushing out money until they could see results. Those were the lines they intended to work along. Mr Murdoch, in dealing with the question of research, said that investigation was necessary. They had their experts at Massey College and had to pay them. There was the 'question of pastures. The Morrinsville factory had been troubled with food flavours in milk and the experts had been investigating the matter. Last year the cost for research had been £3500 for the board and £3500 for the Government, but the £2500 received from the Research Association had disappeared. The board had offered to give. £11,500 pound for pound with the Government, but there was evidently a Scotsman in charge of the Treasury and the Government would not do it. The job of the research men was to find out what was wanted and they should endeavour to give people what they wanted. Mr Murdoch then quoted some figures dealing with cheese export that had appeared in the dairy report. He said that in 1928 the total imports of cheese into Great Britain had been 153,317 tons and in 1933 the total was 151.983 tons. Canada and New Zealand had been the principal suppliers; Canada in 1928 sending 30 per cent, of the total and New Zealand 51.5 per cent. In 1933 Canada had exported to Britain 20.72 per cent, of the total, New Zealand’s proportion being 67.76 per cent. New Zealand’s growth in comparison with Canada was even more striking when seen in terms of tons. In 1928 Canada’s total was 45,992 tons and New Zealand’s total was 77,774 tons. The respective figures for 1933 were 31,486 tons and 102,970 tons. Apparently New Zealand was getting its produce on the market, but it was not so much a matter of competition as the.. local demand in Canada. Previous to the embargo Canada had had a big market in the United States, but the embargo had arrived and had affected New Zealand, because formerly Canada had sent large quantities of cream'into the United States and New Zealand had exported butter to Canada. Now that was all stopped. Another Competitor. On the Home market New Zealand now had another competitor in the Home producer. Mr Baxter, who had visited New Zealand, had told members of Parliament that it was intended to put milk on the market at one shilling a gallon. That would get rid of 84 per cent, and the remaining 16 per cent, could be put on the market in the form of cheese. Mr Baxter’s point was to persuade the people of New Zealand to accept a quota.. When Mr Baxter had mentioned a shilling to 1/2 a gallon the speaker had told him that he could not do it, because that meant butter at 2/6 a pound and that price could not be obtained in New Zealand. The additional cost to the consumer in England had been £500,000 and that would not last long. He had been told there was controversy over the scheme and that would react favourably to the scheme. He did • not favour quotas—under them the Government could not go ahead with land settlement—and he hoped they would not come about. They should endeavour to meet the British people in every way and he thought arrangements should be made to get a bigger preference than was now the case. Lower tariffs at the New Zealand end should also be sought, but they could not be removed also. He thought • that the lifting of the exchange meant an additional 2d a pound on butter and Id on cheese. It was indeed handy, but was equivalent to a higher tariff. He was satisfied that the higher exchange had done a lot of good for the farmers and there was not the kick from the townspeople that there had been formally. It was fixed and the only way it could affect the townspeople would be by lowering it suddenly, and that was not likely. The raising of the exchange had also placed .New Zealand on a parity with Australia. ■ Mr Murdoch went on to refer to the present arrangement with Auckland for the fixation of a minimum price. By a “gentleman’s agreement New Zealand and Australia had a fixed minimum price week by we ek. The. New Zealand product was slightly higher, but it was on afixed basis. An arrangement had also been made regarding shipments of produce from the Dominion and the Commonwealth at certain times. For himself he would contend that both sides should keep the agreement. It had not been kept, but New Zealand was not the offender. The board was at present m communication with Australia and. they would either get something binding or paddle their own canoe. He thought it would be wise to have an arrangement. Both were exporting countries and did not want price-cutting, but Australia had to play the game. A National Matter. Mr Hale, in the course of brief remarks said he appreciated the opportuni'y of having been able to come south and thus get into personal contact with so many of the producers. The dairy industry was confronted with many difficulties and to deal with them the board had been appointed. A first necessary step was that the members should become thoroughly conversant with the problems, and, for himself he would say he desired to proceed cautiously. Too much should

not be expected of the board at the outset, but he could assure them that the numerous problems were, being thoroughly analysed with a view to improvements in the industry being effected as soon as possible, it was gratifying to learn that Southland had, for some time, been taking steps to grapple with its own difficulties, and he hoped that northern provinces would follow that example. There were many leakages occurring in the industry, and he firmly believed considerable savings could be effected to the advantage of the producers. Mr Marchant assured those present that he intended to adopt a national, as against a parochial, viewpoint when attempting to solve the problems confronting the industry. He referred to the team spirit animating the Dairy Board, the members of which, he emphasized, were dealing with the business in hand with the one desire —an earnest endeavour to assist the industry. The board’s responsibility was a great one and the members could not merely wave a wand and eliminate all the difficulties. They did, however, Hope to smooth them out. Questions Answered. The chairman having invited questions, Mr R. Grieve (Rimu) inquired whether the board intended to conduct any of its advertising by personal contact. Were canvassers to be employed 1 In reply Mr Brash'said that onethird of the advertising would be through the newspapers and a certain portion by means of canvassers, while a considerable amount would be through display methods. Mr Murdoch said he explained that the new board had not . really thoroughly discussed the media of advertising. He, personally, had great faith in film advertising in the (Nd Country. Samples, too, could, with advantage, be distributed through the schools. Mr D. Rutledge emphasized the desirability of a proper identification of the New Zealand produce. Would the board consider packing New Zealand butter under one brand? Mr Dunlop said he had always supported that, but there had been a drifting- away from such a policy adopted in the past. Sometimes New Zealand produce was sold under , the brand “Empire” and this Dominion, unfortunately, was often the sufferer in this respect. Mr A. Millard ‘ (Gorge Road) questioned the efficacy of advertising in respect of New Zealand cheese seeing the demand for that produce had dropped. That an increase manufacture of cheese in the Old Country had been one of the factors governing the lessened demand for New Zealand cheese war. the view expressed by Mr Brash. The advertising moneys were spent with a due regard both to butter and cheese. The lack of a consumptive demand for cheese had certainly given rise to anxiety. What was the reason? Perhaps cheaper meat Was one of the troubles. Question of Holding Cheese. Asked to express an opinion whether the withholding of New Zealand cheese from the Home market for a year might prove beneficial, Mr Dunlop said that often agents in the Old Country, acting on instructions from their Dominion principals, withheld their cheese. It was very debatable who were the right people to hold the cheese. If a factory was going to hold its cheese in England it should, at least, release a portion of it there on arrival. Mr T. Major: What is the best way to sell one’s cheese when there is a meat market at Home? 1 Mr Brash: I don’t think cheese should be held in the Old Country except by the one controlling organization. To store cheese in London cannot be intelligently done unless it is controlled in that way. , , Mr A. H. Mackrell said that under the new regulations cheese put on board a boat on consignment could not be sold until it reached its destination. There had been a very good reason for bringing in those regulations. Referring to national farm instruction, Mr Murdoch said that the board intended going thoroughly into that matter. The main question was, however: Who was going to pay the piper? They could take it, however, that the board would do something along the lines of dairy instruction. He, personally, thought the Dairy Division should have the whole control of that department. , £ . The careless handling of cheese crates before they were slung aboard ships was referred to by Mr J. H. Bocock. . , , i Mr Murdoch, said that the board was taking every possible step to prevent mishandling. . Replying to a question, Mr Dunlop said the board had no authority to close any factory and he did not think it ever would have the authority. As far as zoning was concerned a good deal of it would be done voluntarily. Southland did not lend itself to zoning so readily as other parts of New Zealand and it would not be troubled. Tributes Paid. Mr W. Carswell paid a tribute to the board’s staff and referred -to the harmonious relations existing between the staff and the secretaries of the dairy companies. Communications were always treated promptly and courteously Ind that attitude was much appreciated. Mr Rutledge, referring to the new board, said that they had all viewed that body with a certain amount ot suspicion. However, he could now say that he did not think he had ever heard a better summary of the boards work and aspirations than Mr Murdoch had given them that day. It was a most encouraging hope for the future. Appreciation of the kindly references made regarding both the staff and the board was expressed by Mr Murdoch. The board had come before them with certain preconceived ideas and they would make an honest attempt to put them into operation, he said. If they could not do so, then he assured them it would be through no fault of theirs. Delegates to Conference. - Delegates to the Dominion Conference in Wellington in September were elected as follows (only the required number being nominated): Messrs John Fisher (butter interests), A. Millard (Gorge Road), A. M. Weir (Menzies Ferry), G. Davis (Orepuki) and A. J. Townley (Brydone), representing cheese interests.