CHEESE POOL UNCERTAIN

Taranaki Daily News, 14 August 1930, Page 9

CHEESE POOL UNCERTAIN

POOR PRODUCE ON MARKET DEBATE UPON STANDARDISATION. (NORTH TARANAKI FARMERS’ VIEWS. Whether to form a. voluntary cheese pool to provide for a levy on each crate exported, the money so collected to be paid as a premium on finest grade cheese, was considered at a meeting of about 100 representatives of dairy companies exporting through Moturoa at New Ply* mouth yesterday. The scheme was outvoted by 8 factories to fr. Many did not record their votes, stating that their directors had yet to consider the matter. The following companies favoured the scheme: —Bell Block, Eltham, Kaimiro, Lowgarth, Ngaere, Waitoitoi. Those companies which opposed the scheme were Brooklands, Frankley Road, Kaimata, Kaponga, Oxford, Rahotu, Stratford Farmers’ and Warea. At present the position is uncertain. Of the 22 factories represented at the meeting only 14 voted. At the end of the meeting it was announced by mistake that the voting had been in favour of the pool by 13 to 4. The meeting consequently broke up under the impression that a pool would probably be formed in North Taranaki, though the chairman explained that the votes would not be held binding. The correct results were forwarded to the Presss when the mistake was discovered. If sufficient support is not forthcoming to form a pool in North Taranaki an alternative is proposed that federation members sending cheese to Moturoa could be invited to join in the Patea pool, at the same time continuing io send their produce to Moturoa as usual for grading. Mr. J. B. Hine, acting-chairman of the New Zealand Dairy Produce Export Board, presided, accompanied by the secretary of the board, Mr. T. C. Brash. The motions for tlm consideration of the meeting were:— (a) That the scheme be a voluntary one. (b) That it be for one season. (e) That the levy on all cheese be 2s. per crate. (d) That cheese grading 901 points carry a premium of sd. per crate, 91 points 10d., fill points lud., 92 points 20d., 93 points 30d. POSITION OF DAIRY BO.ARD. Mr. Hine, in introducing the subject, referred to the resolution passed at the Hamilton conference of the N.D.A., favouring a pool for the purpose of making a levy and paying a premium on finest cheese, the Dairy Board to carry the scheme into effect. The board found it had not the power to make a differential levy, and, further, the board’s power of making levies was limited, so that if it struck the highest levy it was allowed to strike it would still have insufficient to put the scheme into effect. The only alternative was for the board to ask Parliament for power to make a further levy. The board believed, however, that it was hopeless to approach Parliament for this power at the present time, owing to ths political and economic conditions.

At present they could not go to Parliament with a united industry. South Taranaki was opposed to a Dominion pool, and the South Island would have nothing but a Dominion pool. . The big companies in the Waikato objected to it altogether until compulsory milk grading was adopted. South Taranaki urged that a voluntary pool should be adopted, and the board had agreed that if a voluntary pool was inaugurated its officers would do all the work of collecting the levies and paying the premiums without making a charge. Mr. Hine said he would like to refer to the question of quality. He had noticed that at the annual meetings of factories there had been a tendency to minimise the position and say it was due to the depressed market. That was not so. The quality of cheese had slipped, and slipped most lamentably. It was not necessary to go to the merchants in Britain to learn that. Mr. Davis and Mr. lorns, of the Dairy Board, had both drawn attention to it. GOVERNOR GENERAL’S WARNING. The Dominion’s Governor-General, Lord Bledisloe, had warned the people of New Zealand that they must give the customers what they required. Only last week, said Mr, Hine, he had received a letter from Mr. lorns which said that at the present time there were delegations of Finnish and Latvian dairymen in England investigating the possibilities and modes of manufacture of cheddar cheese. They would go into the position and make what the market wanted. They were alive to the fact that the New Zealand produce was not in the same condition as it used to be, and if there was a possible chance they would slip in and try to capture the market.

The question was whether the dairy companies were prepared to join in this voluntary pool with the endeavour to improve the quality of the cheese. It had been said that if factories strove for quality they would lose yield, and in that respect compare unfavourably with neighbouring factories. It seemed that if the companies joined the pool that phase would be obviated, for the factories that strove for finest would get the premium. There was no doubt that the industry’s house had to be put in order. Air, L. J. Rundle, Bell Block, moved the motions as stated. The time had arrived, he said, when they were at the parting of the ways. To his mind, something on the lines of the motion would be an honest endeavour to improve cheese. During the control period those factories which had graded highest received higher prices and paid as well as most of the factories in New Zealand. Ngaere and Bell Block were cases in point. Behind the motion was a feeling that something must be done, whether in the form of a pool at Aloturoa or Patea, or a pool for the whole of Taranaki.

Mr. Taylor, Ngaere, seconded the motion. They had seen the reports of factory meetings, and in nearly every case shareholders had been congratulated on the quality of their cheese by the agents. It was not in human nature for an agent to send an individual bad report. It was simply not done. But when they read the independent reports of some of the biggest firms handling the cheese farmers could see they were anything but good. Just recently one of these reports had said that New Zealand cheese was poor compared with Canadian, was loose in texture, and so on. The'scheme was not ffoing to give

any great return or end in any great loss. But it was an incentive to managers and would restore the confidence of the powers at Home. He hoped farmers would form a pool in North Taranaki,, as they had in South Taranaki. PREMIUM DURING CONTROL. . Mr. W. C. Green, Rahotu, asked if it was not a fact that there had been a premium on cheese in the control board's time, and that the board had not favoured it? Had it not found that cheese on which a premium was paid in New Zealand had not received the same consideration at the other end? That was not altogether correct, replied the chairman. There had been division on the control board about the matter, but within the last two years the majority of the board had favoured a premium. Mr. Brash said that it was true that .the full premium allowed by the board had not been realised on the market. The sum of 2s. had been received, in- ; stead of the 3s. 4d. allowed. Was it not a fact that the great trouble to-day arose from standardisation, asked Mr. Green. Mr. Hine seemed to know something, and had something at the back of his mind, but was afraid to make it known. Why had not the board made known the results of standardisation? He knew for a fact that standardisation was the cause of the trouble. Unless the manager was given good milk he could not make a good article. It could not be made from rotten material. What he wanted to know was, did standardisation pay? Had it not been the cause of bringing down the price of full cream cheese ? Mr. Hine replied that only last week he thought Mr. Green said that the trouble was faulty manufacture. As for himself, he had never been in favour ; of standardisation, but he did not think | standardisation was responsible for all •of the trouble. The main cause was the over-incorporation of water, factories going in for too much moisture. Quality had been slipping before this year. He agreed that it would have been wise if standardisation had never been introduced, but it was here, and was going to remain for the next few mouths. The pool scheme, was not going to be costly. The only reason the board had undertaken to sponsor the scheme was that it thought it was in the interests of the dairy industry.

CHEESE MADE FOR SHOW.

Mr. Taylor, Ngaere, said Mr. Green had referred to standardisation as being the principal cause of the deterioration in New Zealand cheese. He knew of cheese which had been made for the shows, and the manager had made the show cheese with 10 per cent, of skim milk. That cheese had taken prizes in Waikato and throughout Taranaki. If that could be done in making cheese for shows, why could it not be done for general making? It was rather the abuse of standardisation that was the trouble.

Mr. A. 0. Penwarden, Patua, did not consider standardisation was the root of the evil. His factory had produced 49 per cent, of finest cheese with standardisation. The whole trouble came through excessive skimming. Ever since the control year, said Mr. Brash, cheese quality had been slipping. In the control year Patea produced 46 per cent, finest and last season 6 per cent.; New Plymouth had produced 53 per cent, finest and last season 13 per per cent. The trouble had not altogether

come about through standardisation. There had been a falling-off before it was introduced. It was possible to make a poorer cheese with standardised, but at the same time good high class cheese could be made out of standardised milk. As regards the levy, a factory would lose 101-d. at 91; 5Jd. at 91|; it would be just about even at 92; at 93 and over the factory would gain 9}d. Mr. Brash had referred to a Hawke’s Bay factory which had produced all finest cheese from, standardised milk, said Mr. Gibson. He wished to know how the shipments graded upon arrival at the Home market.

“Two shipments did not turn out at all well,” said Air. Brash, amidst laughter. Although the cheese was finest, he said, the quality was not maintained at the end of the voyage. This sometimes happened and the speaker instanced one case wherein a shipment of some cheese grading 94 upon shipment from New Zealand returned the worst reports that factory had received over a long period of years. Mr. E. Griffiths, New Plymouth, held that a great deal depended upon the grading. In a sales contract just completed payment on first grade and finest differed by Is. in the cwt.

SCRAMBLE FOR YIELD,

The trouble with standardised cheese, said Air. Green, was that it would not stand up. The department should not be allowed to grade standardised cheese as highly as full cream. The cheese today was better than the cheese made two, three, or 10 years ago. Eight or 10 years ago there was a great scramble for yield. Factories began skimming. Then standardisation was brought in. He himself could see no reason for a pool. It was simply taking money out of one pocket and putting it into another. They were just chasing another wild-cat scheme. If the board really wanted to improve the quality it should try to assist in compelling the inspection of the raw material. The scheme was only giving the manager a stick to beat the suppliers with. If he did not get the grade at the end of the season he would say the suppliers had given him poor milk. Any manager to-day could make good cheese if he were given

good raw material, How had pasteurisation affected the quality of the cheese? Mr. Hine was asked? Had not some suppliers passed in milk under pasteurisation which otherwise they would not? The general belief was that pasteurisation was not greatly responsible for the trouble, said Mr. Hine. Mr. J. F. Phillips, Waitoitoi, said his factory had sent out 330 crates of cheese, and it was graded first and finest. Many full cream factories today were not doing that. The average test at the factory was 4.G. The quality of the cheese was said to be slipping, said Mr. S. Vickers, Omata, and the object of the pool was to give an inducement to improve the cheese. He would have thought that the proper inducement would be the advantage in price of the better cheese on the London market. Unfortunately, there seemed to be no advantage there. If the price made it worth while improving the cheese then there would be no need for the pool. He had reliable information that 80 per cent, of New Zealand cheese at Home to-day was “market breaking,” instead of “market building.” At present there seemed to be a system of averaging prices. A factory with a 2.65 yield was not going to sacrifice that to a 2.55 yield when it was getting as much in P.U?® the bigger jrield.

“CHEESE NOT .FIT TO EAT.” Mr. Marchant, Cardiff, said the meeting generally was of the opinion that the cheese was not what it used to be. How was it going to be brought back? It was common knowledge that some of the cheese sent out in the last 12 months was not fit to eat. If they would not eat it themselves, how could they expect the man at Home to eat it? He was sure that the price obtained for poor quality cheese regulated the price of the whole. The scheme proposed was an incentive. The abuse of standardisation had been partly the cause of the poor cheese, but not wholly. Moisture was a big factor. But where standardisation was undertaken on proper lines it was quite successful. If 40 per cent of moisture on an average was incorporated by some factories in the season those factories were taking a ] short-sighted view. He wanted to know j whsft percentage of skim milk was ) added to the cheese of the factory in Hawke’s Bay mentioned by Mr. Brash. Mr, Brash said that the manager never went beyond 15 per cent, of skim milk. Why was it, asked Mr. E. Hann (Stratford), that the people in Britain ! would not pay for good cheese? Mr. Hine replied that the whole standard of New Zealand cheese was lowered by the inferior quality, and the whole scale of values fell. “Tell us who makes this Inferior cheese?” said Mr. Green. “I could name five factories as fast as my tongue would speak —’’said Mr. j Hine. ' “Yes, that’s what I want to know,”| said Mr. Green. j “But I am not going to,” concluded i Mr. Hine. i Mr. Marchant considered that cheese ; which deteriorated badly was cheese ; overloaded with moisture. : There was a 1G per cent, moisture ■ limit with butter, said Mr. Penwarden. >. Why could not a similar regulation be; framed for cheese? , He understood there were technical ; difficulties in the w r ay, said Mr. Hine. , Mr. Gibson said he saw no reason i why premiums should be held out to factories as an inducement to produce | the best cheese. There was no doubt that the premium did take the form of an inducement, but why was such a reward needed? Factories, he said, were not all situated in the same conditions. The factories situated in lower altitudes made the bulk of the cheese, but they would be required to hand over a levy to higher-situated factories, for the latter were in a better temperature for cheese-making, and generally turned out the best article. “That rather upsets Mr. Green’s argument, then,” said Mr. Hine. “He said.we would be taking money from one pocket to put into the other; you say the bulk of the factories would be paying a few on a higher level and capable of producing better cheese. The latter idea is what we are driving at. The. premium is for the encouragement of better cheese production.” Mr. Taylor, manager at Lowgarth, stated with regard to show cheese that 10 per cent, of skim milk was used together with milk of the best quality obtainable. He preferred lower testing milk, and maintained that it made the best cheese. With standardisation 30 per cent, of skim milk was all right, but it would be better if 10 per cent, to 15 per cent, was used. However, competition with other factories drove j up the percentage, for a manager had to satisfy shareholders in the‘matter of results, Over-moisture syjd undgr-in pig •

ture caused a lot of the trouble. Managers, although only too pleased to do everything within their power to improve the standard of cheese, were forced to keep their companies on the same level as other companies. The less the milk was handled the better was the cheese. Mr. H. Lepper said that very satisfactory results had been received by Lepperton since the introduction of standardisation, and he failed to see any reason why other factories could not succeed where one had done so. The reason for their non-success must lay in the quality of the raw material they received. It was very noticeable in the Lepperton factory that the first vat of milk always gave the best cheese, owing, no doubt, to the fact that it received no sun, and less warmth. Mr. J. Thompson, manager at Waitoitoi, held that standardised milk would make better cheese in the autumn than full-cream milk. Mr. R. J. Knuckey, Eltham, suggested that the grading should be done at the other end. Then the cheese would be true to label, and there would be no need for a premium. Cheese only a fortnight old could be graded in New Zealand, and it was really only curd. Did Mr. Hine know anything about the results of standardisation at the other end? asked Mr. Green. It had been condemned at the other end, holus bolus, said Mr. Hine. One reason for this was that it did not keep. Mr. Rundle briefly replied. He appealed to the farmers to support the proposal, or at least, to bring forward some other solution. They were prepared to do anything at all to help the industry. Votes of thanks were passed to the chairman and Mr. Brash.