STANDARDISED CHEESE

Taranaki Daily News, 23 December 1930, Page 11

STANDARDISED CHEESE

MR. P. O. VEALE’S POSITION

HOW THE PROCESS WAS ADOPTED.

INDUSTRY WARNED AT OUTSET.

A vigorous reply to critics and an outline of the parts played by the Federation of Taranaki Co-operative Dairy Factories and himself with regard to cheese standardisation was given by Mr. P. O. Veale in the course of his report. to the fifth annual meeting of the federation at Hawera yesterday. He had been declared the originator of the scheme and both he and the federation had been blamed for leading the industry astray. Cheese standardisation had been accepted by a representative conference of the cheese industry in December, 1928, said Mr. Veale. • “The industry went in for that innovation with its eyes open. Personally, I was opposed to it.” Mr. Veale had warned the industry of the prejudice which existed, not in his mind, but in the minds of the people the world over, against a cheese, however good, which was made from anything other than genuine whole milk. Since no notice was taken of his warnings he admitted that he had got behind the movement and helped it to success with all his ability. Having made a promising start with standardisation, tho industry-, despite his warnings, had run headlong into dangers the next season. ‘‘My conscience therefore is clear on the subject of standardisation,” said Mr. Veale.

“There can be no doubt that the controversies and discussions which followed the publication of the ‘Tokaora Test’ in 1928 did much to mould public opinion along the line of recognising that abnormally high fat cheese is uneconomic.,to produce, and may be, under our present methods,'a source of manufacturing trouble and. of fault in quality,” said Mr. Veale. “ Some persons have attributed blame to the federation for having instructed me to carry out this work, yet the .results, of this and subsequent investigations have thrown light upon circumstances which it would be folly for cheese producers to ignore. BUTTER PRODUCES LESS. ‘.TA, may not generally be known that the pound of butter-fat to-day produces at least 6 per cent, less cheese than it did prior to the war, and that, if the rise in butter-fat tests continues for another five years as it has done from 1925 to 1930, the pound of ibutter-fat will be producing practically 9 per cent, less cheese than it did in .the. pre-war years. Moreover, if errors in body and texture continue tp pile up for another five years, cheese producers can look forward to the disappearance of considerably more than 9 per cent, of the income they otherwise might have been earning. “How: any person can attribute blame to an. executive of thinking men for feeling, alarm at such a set of circumstances, I fail to see. The federation executive would, I think, have justly earned the Condemnation of the industry had they ignored matters of such vital interest to producers.” , j ' . - The federation therefore had convened a conference of the whole New Zealand cheese industry, which was held in Wellington in December, 1928, continued the. report. The business ot the conference had been set out in a printed agenda paper as follows: —“To discuss the.question of the increasingly high butter-fat content of milk used for cheesemaking, and the present system of. factory payment (on tjhe butter-fat basis) for milk supplied to cheese factories.” In order to facilitate discussion an order of reference had been ' printed, submitting, in all, seventeen questions for consideration. Those seventeen questions covered three broad issues, namely, (1) to consider the possibility either of manufacturing a new variety of super-fatty cheese, or of so advertising their cheese and educating the buying public to its high fat content that it could’ command a premium over less fatty varieties capable of adequately compensating the producers; (2) to introduce a fiew system of payout for milk, which would correct the present tendency to breed for but-ter-fat alone, and create a bias in favour of a type of dairy cow* more suited to economic cheesemaking; (3). to. consider the advisability of introducing standardisation either as a whole season measure, or if that were thought unwise, to consider legalising it in the autumn months only, in order to help factory managers to overcome their manufacturing difficulties. No attempt had been made to sway the conference in any manner whatsoever, but the principle of standardisation had been accepted by the delegates. present from amongst , the alternatives offered for discussion. The industry had gone in for that innovation with its eyes open, as portion of the discussion had been directed by the order of reference towards considering the effect of standardisation upon quality, the likelihood of the creation of a prejudice against their cheese, , and the possibility of dispelling such prejudice by advertising. The Director of the Dairy Division had gone to the meeting with the results of an extensive trial of the standardising process, and in anticipation had prepared a: new brand for standardised cheese, using the words “Fat 50 per cent. or. over” instead of “Full Cream.” That had been adopted, and a mandate given, to the Director of the Division to introduce full season standardising by regulation. That had been done in January, 1929. ' ■ ‘ * OPPOSED TO THE INNOVATION. “Personally I was opposed ,to the innovation and at the conference strongly opposed the new brand,” said Mr. Veale. “I felt sure that a satisfactory standardised cheese could be made, but stated that unless we retained the title ‘full cream’ we .were asking for opposition, to the new cheese, and I would not be in favour of standardisation.”

At that time, it would have been possible to have legally exported and sold as “full cream” cheese in England any chgese which contained over 45 per cent, of fat in the dry matter. Th© law contained no provision whatever regarding cheese composition, and the only species of control was an agreed standard amongst public analysts that a cheese was entitled to the description “full cream” if it contained 45 per cent, of fat in the dry matter. Seeing that they were aiming at 50 per cent, as a minimum, their cheese could always have been legally branded with that universally accepted, if meaningless, label “full cream.”

“Now, however, the position is different. We have indulged in so much talk, and have brought the spotlights of publicity so much upon our use of skim milk that the whole world knows about this one feature of our manufacture, although still ignorant of the special conditions which render it necessary and expedient and distinguish us from every other cheesemaking country. Tn consequence, new legislation has actually been brought before the English Par-

liament requiring that, if evidence can be produced to show that a cheese hap been, made with the aid of skim milk, it shall be branded ‘skim-milk cheese.’ To do so is, of course, to class it as an inferior, low grade, low priced article, irrespective of its butter-fat content. The legislation has not actually been passed as yet, but the mere fact of its having been brought forward is, to my inind, a pijoof that standardised cheese can now never hope to be considered by th© English mind as anything other than an inferior article. ’■ f ' , ’ “My own attitude has, I hope, always been dear. I have always maintained that a satisfactory standardised cheese could be made if we tried, but tnat it would prove impossible to dispel the prejudice in the English mind; against any cheese, however rich in fat, as long as they know, or think, it contains any skim milk. In my .Tokaora bulletin I stated plainly that it would probably damage our reputation if we attempted to modify the present richness of our milk by a process of part-skimming, and' my last, words in the whole report were that a return to lower fat tests in,our cheese milk could best be done,, not by any attempt to part-skim or otherwise modify the milk-.of high testing cows, but by the widespread adoption of lower testing breeds of cattle in cheesemaking areas.' , < z -/-., -■- |

TREADING ON DANGEROUS GROUND

“In my annual report for 1928, immediately prior to the Wellington . conference, I devoted considerable space in replying to a newspaper correspondent, who had attacked me because I was opposed, to standardisation. . I assured the industry that in contemplating: standardisation it was | treading upon , really dangerous ground) I felt it W;as my bounded duty to warn the industry of the. prejudice which existed, not in my mind.- but tin /the. minds of people the world over,- against- a cheese, however good,* which is made from anything other than genuine Whole milk. 1 quoted the commonly accepted all-embracing definition of ‘skim-milk cheese’ and asked how we could adopt any process -of standardisation and avoid falling within the definition of 1 skim-milk cheese as' understood by . the large majority of the distributing trade and consuming public in England. I sppke of the, d,ang.er of having our cheese classed; with a low price part-skimmed cheese already offering in limited quantities on the English market,, and emphasised that the danger was a real one, likely, to. do our industry ‘infinite harm. ■ r >/■.; : i “Such were my views as published in the local press before standardisation was ever legalised. I will admit.’ that, since no notice was taken of my warnings, and the industry committed itself for good or , bad to standardisation,' I have got behind the movement and helped to the best of my .ability to make it a success. For the sake of the industry I would rather have been proved a false prophet than have seen my. fears realised. In fact, after the very good start made wjth a modest use of skim milk in the autumn of 1928-29, it appeared as though standardisation would succeed and that I should be confounded, ;'// .

“Perhaps I was a little eager to acclaim the success of the 1 new process in njy last annual report, delivered in August, 1929, but while sb doing I issued the following warning, which in the light of ■ present knowledge appears to have been well founded:—, “.‘lt now remains for us, by scrupulous and unremitting care, to keep up the standard; and firmly establish standardised cheese as at least the equal, of full cream on the English market. Present indications are that this can be done, and that, if standardised ' cheese suffers in price in the future it will'be ( through our own default.’ “My conscience therefore is clear' on tho subject of standardisation. The industry committed, itself to the business despite my grave warnings of the dangers it was incurring. Then, having made a fairly promising start, and having temporarily avoided those dangers, it runs headlong into them the following season by again ignoring a sound warning regarding the necessity, for. keeping up the quality. : The damage has been done by the ridiculous and ruinous competition between factories which are supposed to bo co-operative in spirit, but no one can ever say that the industry lacked good advice or can blame anyone but itself for the present position of its. cheese.”