The Sun 42 Wyndham Street, Auckland, N.Z. THURSDAY, AUGUST 11, 1927. FATE OF THE DAIRY BOARD

Sun (Auckland), Volume I, Issue 120, 11 August 1927, Page 10

The Sun 42 Wyndham Stre et, Auckland, N.Z. THURSDAY, AUGUST 11, 1927. FATE OF THE DAIRY BOARD

A NAIVE statement was made by the Minister of Agriculture in the House of Representatives last evening about the control of dairy produce export and the work and influence of the board. The Hon. O. J. Hawken even went so far as to say that it looked as if the Dairy Produce Control Board’s influence on the r British market was very small one way or the other. It has to be recognised, of course, that the Minister had a dual object in saying' a kind word for a board that has received more bricks than bouquets during its expensive career. The Government’s association with the board also had to be defended against present misapprehension and future hostility. So, knowing that many dairy farmers have a sack of bones to pick with the Reform Administration for its influence on the board’s policy of retreat from price fixation, Mr. Hawken most plausibly contended that the Government’s attitude on the question was right as right can be. Indeed, the Ministry had always agreed that the board would not be able to make much difference in the prices received for dairy produce at Home. Moreover, the Government always had advised caution on the part of the board and was against price-fixation or any attempt to raise artificially the price of dairy produce in England. If such were the policy of the Government (and we must accept Mr. Hawken’s assurance that it was without question), why did not it emphasise its penetrative wisdom more openly and vigorously when it saw the board go blundering into the fixation of prices. Inarticulate wisdom is not much better in practice than stupidity. The popular contention that the producers have lost b eavily through the board’s policy is dismissed by the Minister of Agriculture as a hollow exaggeration. The monetary loss was not as great, Mr. Hawken asserts, as has been imagined. Since no arithmetical evidence is available for or against the Minister’s assertion, we must take his word for it and hope for the best. Another reference in the Budget Debate to dairy control is worth more than casual attention. It was mentioned by Mr. J. A. Nash, Palmerston North, that, in addition to the complete failure of the board’s policy and a most disastrous season for farmers, it was understood the expenditure of the board had exceeded the income derived from the levy upon factories. This raises the question of the board’s fate. Is it worth while spending any money at all on an organisation, including Government representatives, which, in the deliberate opinion of the Minister of Agriculture, “looks as if its influence on the British market was very small one way or the other.” In view of the reversion to a free market with a child-like confidence in the delightful generosity of speculators, and also having regard for the establishment of a big marketing company to handle a great proportion of the Dominion’s dairy produce, the time seems ripe for a dissolution of the board and the dismissal of its members with thanks for its services and forgiveness of its errors.