Taranaki's Staple Industry

Stratford Evening Post, Volume XXXIX, Issue 99, 31 August 1923, Page 5

Taranaki's Staple Industry

DAIRY PRODUCE EXPORT * CONTROL ACT. Realising the importance of this piece of legislation to the Tarannfci district, a representative of the Stratford Evening Post, interviewed Mr E. Masters, M.P., this morning on the Dairy Produce Export Control Act, regarding which the member for Stratford has taken a very prominent part, both on the Special Committee set up to deal with it, and during its course through the House. Asked if he would state his reasons for opposing the Bill, 31r Masters said he ha<J not opposed the Bill, but certain principles and certain machinery clauses in it. "Had anyone set out to kill the Bill they would not have been faced with a difficult task," he said, "owing to the fact that it was only brought down from the Committee four days before the end of the session/' I fully appreciate that some legislation is required for improving the marketing of our produce and holding that view I had no desire to kill th© Bill ag a whole.

"From the moment I wag elected to the Committee I set out with two ideals: (1) That the compulsory I clauses should not come into operaI tion \mtil those vitally affected, the [producers, should have the right to J say if their produce should be oomjpulsorily ontrolled; (2) That instead of the Dairy Produce Control Board ' being elected under the Electoral College system, it should be elected by a direct vote of the farmers, every supplier to a factory having the right to say who 'should dispose of hi s produce. "During the course of the Bill through Committee, I wa s successful in getting the clause dealing with the latter altered to meet my wishes, but was defeated on the former."

"But the former is provided for," said our reporter.

"Yes," said Mr Masters, "bni this wa 8 conceded by the Prime Minister after a 6tmnuous fight in the House, and naturally I am pleased with the results."

"Are there special reasons why ft referendum should be given in connection with this particular legislation?" was asked, ito which Mr Masters replied: "Certainly there are. First of all it means the passing of legislation of a syndicalist naturedealing with what is now the greatest of our industries—an; industry that hag grown in its export value from £4,892,000 in 1914 to £17,000 r 000 last year. Secondly, there appears, to be a very.; strong jdivisjon 4$ opinion amongst the producers a s to the need or advisability of such n course. According to the figures submitted to the House by Sir George Hunter, who was Chairman of the Committee, there were 228 factories in favour while 183 were opposed, lea.ving 113 which had expressed no opinion. Tarauakj appears to he very much opposed to the legislation as 42 voted against it and only 19 in favour. It is worth noting here that the Province was.the only one whore the matter had been fully discussed by the leaders of thought, both for and against. Further, it was found that, even in individual factories, opinion was very much divided We actually had before the Committee members of the same directorate giving evidence for. and against the Bill. In very few instances did we find that the suppliers, those who are directfy affected, had been consulted at all. In view of these facts I was more than ever detorniined that the fanners should have the right to say what action, if any, should be taken, especially in regard to compulsShn."

The question was asked Mr Masters: "In what way does the present Act differ from the original Bill?" "It differs," he said, "first of all us 1 have already stated in the election of the Producers' Board of Control and with the additional clause that the Act shall not come hit" operation until, a referendum has been taken. The financial clauses have been considerably improved also. No provision was made as to the uisposal of the levy which can he collected, viz., a maximum of £IOO,000 per annum. The Board had power to collect this amount and in addition, after paying every legitimate expense out of the sale of the butter and cheese, build up a reserve fund of any amount they might think

t. Through the amendments made in committee their power is restricted so far as then reserve fund is concerned to an amount equal only to the amount collected D .Y w »y *4 eY f in any one year. That is to say if the maximum levy is imposed then the reserve for that year will not be more than £IOO,OOO, and if est £IO,OOO is collected then it is limited to that amount. The Board therefort- i.s not empowered to create any reserve whatsoever out of the actual sales of produce. A reserve fund is necessary," said Mr Masters, "bufc there must; be limitation."

Asked if it was his intention to address any meeting in connection with the matter, Mr Masters said if it was the wish of the dairy companies in hi& electorate he would be pleased to do so but only in the direction of explaining the Bill and not. with the object of propaganda. cither for or against five proposal.