DAIRY CONTROL BOARD

Taranaki Daily News, 17 February 1933, Page 9

DAIRY CONTROL BOARD

ITS ABOLITION URGED OPPOSITION AT OAKURA. FARMERS DISCUSS POSITION. “That the Control Board be abolished” was a resolution passed almost unanimously at a meeting last night of about 50 settlers of the Oakura district, including a number of ladies. Strong opposition was expressed to the board, which it was considered .had been of no use to the industry and was' to a great extent responsible for the present falling off in prices. A committee was set up to further the object of the resolution. The meeting also expressed the opinion that the produce should be graded on its arrival in England with a view to studying the.tastes of the consumer. The meeting was convened by Mr. H. O. Staveley, who said that during the ten years or so of its existence the Control Board had never done the dairy farmer any good. From the very first time the board started _to dictate to Tooley Street the New Zealand producer started to fall. He had never seen a balance-sheet from the board. If the factories received one it was never put before their suppliers. He maintained that the board should place before all dairy farmers a full and accurate account of all its doings both in New Zealand and overseas. He did not know how the board was elected, as he had not had a vote at any time. He pointed out that New Zealand butter had now fallen to the seventies. Speaking on economies at New Plymouth Mr. Smith had stated that in five years’ time New Zealand would not be able to sell any produce at Home, and it looked as. if that statement was likely to come true. Now there was the probability of a quota or a tariff. He stressed the fact that they must keep politics out of the meeting. The Government had a big task to put its house in order, and the dairy farmer must put his house in order also. The Farmers’ Union was doing good work, but the man who milked the cow should have the say. He understood that the Control Board cost the dairy industry £60,000 in levies, for which he held nothing had been received in return.

EVENTS MOVE RAPIDLY. Britain had told them that she did not want New Zealand to pay her interest, £750,000, but New Zealand offered to pay. Britain refused to accept. Neither did Britain want interest from France; yet Britain balanced her Budget. Things had since moved so rapidly that they did not know where they were. Mr. C. J. Harris, who was then voted to the chair, said that he was convinced from inside information that much of the trouble was due to the quality of the produce, which was slipping. Coming down to the price, they had no control over that, as there had been a world-wide fall in prices since 1930, and he could not see any improvement until there was an uplift in world prices. He asked Mr. Staveley to outline his ideas. Mr. Staveley considered that the crux of the whole position was the Control Board. He did not think that the produce had slipped in. quality, as there had been such great improvements in handling. He considered that they must get rid of the Control Board and regain the confidence of Tooley Street and the British public. He agreed with the chairman of the Omata 'Company that the produce should be handled by six reputable Tooley Street firms who controlled millions of money. In their former dealings with Tooley Street the merchants never complained if they lost money over the produce, but came back smiling the next year to try the produce again. The dairy farmer, without interference from anyone prior to the introduction of the Control Board, had worked the dairy industry up to the position' of one of the best industries in the world. There were no complaints as to quality. Why, he asked, did Australian and foreign product now beat Nev/ Zealand produce? He thought that it was due to the handling of the produce when it got Home. He suggested that the six Tooley Street merchants should be asked to give a report on the quality of the produce every month or two, and if necessary then the New Zealand farmer could put his house in order. He denied that the Control Board had saved the industry money in shipping and insurance, as he held that the industry could have gained even more concessions itself. The dairy farmer was producing the goods, but was tied. He must now take the gloves off and fight, without pandering to the Government or anyone i else. The , reports from, the Tooley Street merchants would be reliable, whereas at present they could not gamble on the reports received. , “FARMER HAS DONE HIS BEST.” Mr. Staveley held that the New Zealand farmer had certainly done his best in regard to cleanliness and other matters affecting the quality, and he therefore could not understand why complaints had been made now, whereas there were none prior to the introduction of the Control Board, The dairy farmer could expend up to 6d. per lb. on improving the quality at this end, but until they got rid of the Control Board they would have no salvation. The board would put up a mighty fight for its existence, but if strong representations were made to the Government the board would probably be removed. He held also that before an important decision was made regarding the quota the dairy farmer by means of mass meetings should be asked to voice his opinion in every centre, and not leave it to the Control Board. He questioned whether the farmers who voted for the introduction of the Control Board understood that the board was to be there for all time. If they could, scrap the Control Board he would be one of the. first to assist in improving the industry, no matter what drastic measures were introduced. At present he was opposed to all cream grading, etc., until Tooley Street definitely told them that the qual-: ity of the produce was not satisfactory. The chairman said that he had been given* to understand that the Control Board exercised no control over the produce except in regard to the regulation of shipment. At present they were looking after the freight and insurance, and quotas that went on the boats. They were also doing some advertising, though not enough, in his opinion. He held that the New Zealand farmer should concentrate on quality. He favoured prohibition of anything but finest grade butter and cheese being exported. The Danes had built their industry up on uniform quality. A certain percentage of New Zealand produce was not up to the required quality, and unfortunately a little was enough to condemn the lot. Mr. Staveley said that under his scheme Tooley Street could report on that small percentage of produce -that was not up to quality, and it could be sheeted home to the particular factory. He read an extract from the Taranaki Daily News in which a prominent retired manufacturer from England stressed the splendid quality of New Zealand dairy produce, as well as the necessity for adopting methods of marketing somewhat on the lines of the Danes. From reports

in the papers the opinion- seemed general that the quality of New Zealand produce was splendid, and he thought that they were barking around the wrong tree.

Mr. P. Telford pointed out that New Zealand butter was bought, say, three months before it left New Zealand, and had to pass through numerous hands before it was put on the market. He did not think the New Zealand farmer could effect any improvement on that, no matter what he did. The Danes had an insuperable advantage in their closeness to the market. He thought the quota was really a shot at the men who were speculating in New Zealand butter. If New Zealand continued doubling its output of butter he thought the price would continue to drop. REPORTS ON QUALITY. In reply to Mr. E. Wells, Mr. G. H. Bell said that his factory did not get regular reports on the quality of each shipment. Many of the Tooley Street houses were very loath to give condemnatory reports because the method of marketing was erratic and a report might often react them. Mr. Telford pointed out that the complaints were more general when there was plenty of produce on the market. There were no complaints when the produce was in short supply. Mr. L. Gray asked whether Mr. Staveley had any constructive policy. Personally, he thought that the farmer should work at home to effect improvements by good management of the farm and improved methods. Mr. Staveley said that when they had got rid of the Control • Board he would then give a policy. He held that there was something underlying the proposal to put on a quota, which would be the end of the New Zealand producer. If New Zealand now reduced its quota, say, from 200,000 tons to 100,000 tons, it would never regain the market for the balance. . Mr. Telford: pointed Out that the quota, had appreciated the price of meat. Mr. A. Drake said that it was admitted that world prices, had dropped, but. why was it that since the Control Board had come into force Australia and other countries had caught New Zealand up. Replying to Mr. Telford, Mr. Bell said that the output of Danish- butter had fallen of late. Mr. Telford said. that the Danes had also lost money by the over-production of pork. ' Mr. Drake said that if the fault was on the farms, then 20 or 30 years ago the butter must have been very bad. He thought that if the Control Board was put out and confidence in Tooley Street restored they would do better. Boiled down, the position was not that Tooley Street did not want New Zealand produce, but it did not want the Control Board. .« ■

The chairman said that he was not in favour of the Control Board, as he did not consider that it had done anything for the farmer.

DISCREPANCY IN PRICES.

Mr. Bell said that the variance of 6s to 10s per cwt. between Danish and New Zealand butter had been in existence for some years prior to and since the coming into existence of the Control Board. The big difference of 28s had

only occurred lately. He did not think that the New Zealand producer, on account of geographical difficulties, could ever hope to get right up to the Danes in price, but it should certainly get much closer. He pointed out that Danish butter was favoured by the housewife on account of its spreadability, tending to economical use. The markets had been very unsatisfactory, but reading from the Press reports he thought there were darker days ahead, as the position on the London market looked as though they might be prepared for a further fall in price. He had always supported the Control Board, and still did. He thought that had the industry stood behind the movement it would ultimately 'had won out. The Control Board certainly made a mistake at the start in price fixation, but there must be some body to represent the industry. If they were to rely bn mass meetings of farmers they would get nowhere. He did not think that Tooley Street was up against the Control Board, which had saved the industry thousands in insurance and freights. The Control Board was also closely watching the refrigeration on ships. Tire industry worth millions of pounds annually could ill-afford to be without some body to look after its interests, and if the Control Board were to be abolished some other body would have to be set up. He did not say that the number of members might not be reduced, or the expenses curtailed, but he certainly thought the best men in the industry should be put in control, and should be paid accordingly. Mr. Stavely did not think that the’ savings in freight and insurance were due to the Control Board. TOO MANY IN CONTROL. Mr. W. Thomas considered that to-day there were too many controlling the industry. There were 'tb,e Dairy Division of the Agricultural Department and the Control Board. Until lately there was a third body, the National Dairy Association, and they were all doing the same job. One of the most important questions confronting the industry was that of the suitability of high or’ low testing milk for cheese-making, but the responsibility for finding it appeared to be thrust from one body on to the other. Prior to the Control Board New Zealand cheese always realised more than Canadian, whereas now the position was reversed. He had seen a vast improvement in the methods of manufacturing cheese. There had been a cry that the trouble was on the farm, but. Approvements had been effected there and at the factories also, with the result that their produce was said to be slipping. He held, however, that the grading of the produce was done at the wrong end. It was graded here by experts, who had developed a certain taste, but when it got Home it obtained a different grade, and the grader here was not in a position’ to correctly interpret the’ tastes of the English consuming public. In fact, he doubted if the factories were making the cheese that the New Zealand public liked. He favoured a system of grading in England. Replying to a question, the chairman said that he did not know whether whey butter was mixed with dairy butter, but he understood that at times whey butter had been sold as first; grade New Zealand, butter. The Control Board had now taken the matter in hand. Mr. StaVely said that the Dairy Board should never have allowed it to go on the market.

The chairman pointed out that the matter had previously been, brought up by the Farmers’ Union, but there was strong opposition from the cheese factories.

Mr. W. K. Morris thought that a standard should be set in New-Zealand. The grading should then be earned put in New Zealand. • ' Mr.; Bell said that there must also be some safeguard at this 'end. Mr. Stavely pointed out that other countries sent experts at Home to thoroughly investigate the public taste and manufacture accordingly. ' Mr. Telford thought that the War debts payment throughout the world had affected prices. The unemployed throughout the world also effected the position. The New Zealand farmer was not the only one that was losing. .->■ SHOULD FACE REFERENDUM. Mr. Stavely said that the discussion was getting nowhere. The question was whether they wished to get rid of the

Control Board or not. If they did, how. was the best way to accomplish it? Hit held that the Control Board should not) shelter behind an Act of Parliament, but should be prepared to face a referendum as to whether it was required or 'not Mr. Gray Said r there was diversity o| opinion at the meeting as to the advis? .ability of continuing with the Control Board. He was neutral, but he certainty favoured amalgamating the Meat and Dairy Boards. ' 3 ’ Mr. Bell pointed out that without one body to control the produce there would not be the same possibility of making satisfactory contracts for shipping, .etc. At the last N.D.A. conference the delegates voted strongly in favour tabling the Control . Boards = Mr. Thomas thought the feeling w*S now growing against the -'Control'Board* ■- The chairman said that. any aetm would have to be taken by a representative meeting of. delegates from dairy .factories, throughout' New Zealand? > Mr. Thomas, agreed that it would bn very hard to dig the Control. Board. pu| how. Tt "had cost the industrymillions v of pounds. He was satisfied that tha board had antagonised the Tooley Street merchants, who had not forgotten that -yet.-" ; Replying to Mr. Stavely, Mr. Bell said that men like Sh Thomas Clement did . not condemn the Control Board, but welcomed having some responsible body to which they could make any complaints. He agreed that at the start Tooley Street merchants were antagonistic. The dairy farmer at present had the right to elect the representatives ta the Control Board. - '

Mr, Thomas doubted .if Taranaki could be represented by a better man than the present representative. . ..After further discussion Mr. H. Stavely moved that the Control Board be abolished. . s This was seconded by Mr. W. K. Mor*, ris and carried with two dissentients. The chairman: How are you going tot proceed further? Finally, on the motion of Mr. L. it was resolved that a committee com* prising Messrs. H. O. Stavely, W» K« Morris, A. Drake and W. Thomas txj set up to further the object of the reso* lutioh. ■. '

It was also resolved to make a Setty of Is on those present to meet Mr. Stavely made it clear that he was meeting the expenses of the initial meet* ing. < . On the motion of Messrs. W. Thoma* and E. Wells it was resolved that th< meeting strongly advocated the institu* tion of a system of grading of th*, dairy produce at Home. / J