SATURDAY, OCTOBER 6, 1934. “MUDDLING THROUGH.”

Taranaki Daily News, 6 October 1934, Page 6

SATURDAY, OCTOBER 6, 1934. “MUDDLING THROUGH.”

The reported intention of the Government to strengthen the power and the personnel of the Dairy Control Board will occasion little surprise. Almost since , its inception the board as at present constituted has proved unsatisfactory. It began with the most disastrous experiment the industry has ever known, that of price control and fixation in London, and its latest effort to limit the channels of disposal is not affording general satisfaction. Nearly everyone connected with dairying will admit that the principal justification for board control of an industry is to ‘increase efficiency, and in these days of difficulty efficiency certainly includes successful disposal of the commodities an industry offers the public. It was in the hope of improving marketing arrangements that the board Was set up. That hope has not been realised, though the board has done good work in arranging better shipping and insurance contracts. But in regard to the disposal end of the business the record is sadly disappointing. There have been accusations of sectional and quasi-political interests swaying the board’s decisions. Those accusations may or may not have been justified, but that the opinion of the board’s efficacy is not high may be judged from two farmers’ letters published in the Daily News this week. One writer, Mr. George Gibson, quoted an allegation that the board is allowing its latest f.o.b. regulations to be ignored; the other correspondent, Mr. W. J. Freeth, quoted what he .considers a lack of enterprise on the part of the board in seeking to dispose of butter supplies. Both writers can claim long practical experience of dairying. Their interests are in that industry, and their criticisms of the board could be multiplied whenever dairy farmers meet. It will not be surprising, therefore, if the Royal Commission’s findings include a recommendation for a strengthened Board of Control. But whether the new board should be one dominated by officials is quite another matter. Efficient control is one thing, and bureaucracy another. There has been quite enough extension of' the powers of the bureaucrat in New Zealand during the postwas years, and any increase in those powers will require full justification if it is to be acceptable. Consideration of this must await the Government’s definite proposals, but there is no doubt that Mr. Freeth in his letter, published yesterday, hit the nail on the head when he said that marketing is an expert’s job. For farm and factory management and improvement the industry Is willing to accept the guidance of experts. The improvement in quality already noticeable is the best proof of the wisdom of following their advice. Yet when production, manufacture and grading have been guided by experts the industry has been willing to leave the most important of its functions, that of marketing, to amateurs. It is no reflection upon the members of the Control Board as individuals to make this statement. Salesmanship, like farming, is a skilled calling requiring knowledge, skill, personality and the capacity for hard work. To obtain and main-

tain proficiency in such a calling requires careful training and ever-increasing experience. It is perfectly obvious that new outlets must be sought for the Dominion’s produce—dairy, meat, wool, fruit. The outlook for all these commodities is the same, and better and more consistent salesmanship will be necessary to develop those outlets as they are discovered, or, indeed, to assist in their discovery. At the farm and the factory the movement towards lowered costs and improvement in quality is progressing. It must receive all the help available, but even if uniform high quality is reached a continuance of the present “muddling through” in regard to marketing would discount largely the benefits which ought to accrue. In any reorganisation of the Dairy Control Board the question of skilled marketing will have to be faced.