The Daily News MONDAY, JULY 22, 1929. MARKETING PRODUCE.

Taranaki Daily News, 22 July 1929, Page 10

The Daily News MONDAY, JULY 22, 1929. MARKETING PRODUCE.

The Taranaki addresses of the exponents of the latest plan for the marketing of New Zealand dairy produce were remarkable in at

least one-respect. While the conditions upon which dairy companies might join the new organisation were explained in detail, there was a curious sileuce iu regard to the need for any alteration of existing methods or of definite statements as to the benefits likely to accrue from the new proposals. The speakers, Messrs. W. Grounds and W. Goodfellow, have had long association with the dairy industry, and it may be accepted that in introducing the proposed selling scheme to Taranaki dairy companies they were actuated by a sincere desire to benefit the industry. As to the details of the proposed organisation, and the conditions upon which Taranaki companies can join it, little need be said. That is a matter for individual directorates to consider and make a decision. What the industry as a whole has to consider is whether the new proposals offer any sound and proven advantages ov'er the marketing arrangements now in existence, and if any advantages exist whether they are likely to be permanent. On these points the remarks of Messrs. Grounds and Goodfellow were quite unsatisfying. They were so nebulous as to warrant extreme caution in any consideration of their value. However tempered, the new proposal is the old control and price-fixation one, with its corollary of distrust and suspicion of “Tooley Street” and the desire to dictate to rather than to co-operate with the London merchant. The distrust and suspicion will not be from this end of the business only, as New Zealand was shown when the control policy was given a trial three years ago. The dislike of the British merchant to any interference with the ordinary flow of commerce, and his even more pronounced objection to be regarded as a self-seeking exploiter rather than a co-operator with the producer in New Zealand, led to a development of sources of supply in other countries. New Zealand is still feeling the effect of competition thus stimulated, and if the London market gets the impression that another attempt is to be made to introduce control and price-fixation in this country those in charge of the industry here must be prepared to accept the consequences. They have been shown what those consequences will be, and if they decide to take the risk a second time it must be upon grounds that are unmistakably sure. The best friend of the new proposals could scarcely pretend that the shadowy scheme as outlined in Taranaki gives a sure foundation for the control policy which is its essence. The arrangement with certain Australian factories is mentioned as showing the strength of the new organisation. In quantity of produce handled the figures of the output to be sold by the new combination may look very imposing. There is another side do the matter. New Zealand produce has a reputation and'a standard of quality which bring a better return in cash to the Dominion producer. If Australian produce is to be sold under control in conjunction with that of New Zealand there is the grave probability that the lower price now paid for Australian produce may become the standard for the New Zealand product also. The repercussion of such a policy ought then affect the whole output of the Dominion. It may be that necessary safeguards against this have been provided. They have certainly not been ‘indicated in, the explanations afforded Taranaki producers, and anyone who knows mueh about the London market will know how exceedingly difficult it would be to enforce differentiation of price in produce handled by one organisation and with supplies and prices decided by the seller only. The greatest merit of the new marketing plan is that it is to be voluntary. But even in this regard the danger of a voluntary, scheme being considered but a step to a Dominion policy is by no means to be disregarded. That is undoubtedly the goal at which Messrs. Grounds and Goodfellow and their associates are aiming. There must be no mistake in this regard, and every Taranaki factory which joins the new organisation is definitely a recruit to the party which believes in price-fixation and control whatever the consequence of such a policy may be. Bearing this in mind as the main principle underlying the new plan, it would seem wise for Taranaki interests to watch carefully the experiment in other parts of the Dominion before committing themselves to a policy fraught with such grave possibilities, and one that has already been tried in another form and found wanting.

DEFEAT OF THE ALL BLACKS.’ The result of the second test match in Australia will not be pleasant reading for football enthusiasts throughout New Zealand. When the first was lost by a single point within a few days of the team’s arrival in Sydn y after an exceedingly storm-tossed journey it was felt that an element of luck might have made a difference to the result of the game, and that the team had not got into its stride. The score at the Brisbane match made it quite apparent that the better side won. It is true that accident and ill-health had considerably interfered with the New Zealand team and that casualties while the game was in progress were fairly heavy. These difficulties were not confined to the All Blacks, however, and cannot be held as full explanation of the loss of the second test match, and with it the rubber. As the manager of the team (Mr. J. McLeod) admitted, there can be no question that the game in Australia has improved enormously in the last year or two, but what a good many Rugby enthusiasts will be asking i.-. whether skill and eagerness in the game are being maintained in New Zealand. If not, then the defeat in Australia, if it stimulates endeavours to bring about an improvement here, will have been worth while. Next year will see the arrival in New Zealand of the best team. Great Britain can send, and if there is any need to put its house in order the New Zealand Rugby Union should waste no time in doing so. In the meantime Australia is to be congratulated on its victory in a hard-fought but cleanly-con-tested game.