The Waipa Post. Published on Tuesdays, Thursdays, and Saturdays. SATURDAY, SEPTEMBER 8, 1923. DAIRY EXPORT CONTROL.

Waipa Post, Volume XXIV, Issue 1401, 8 September 1923, Page 4

The Waipa Post. Published on Tuesdays, Thursdays, and Saturdays. SATURDAY, SEPTEMBER 8, 1923. DAIRY EXPORT CONTROL.

EVER since the proposed Dairy Pool was actively championed in the North Island there have been objections raised in the South. As the North easily outstrips the South in the matter of production it may be assumed that the opposition from the South is negligible, but it should be remembered that in Otago and Southland especially the dairying districts include a greater preponderance of farms carrying small herds than obtains in the North. Therefore the number of producers there qualified to vote on the Dairy Produce Export Ctontrol Act must be considerable. "We know that they are not all antagonistic, but they must be Avon over to the other way of thinking within the next month if the Act is to become operative. Unless the favourable votes are considerably more than the adverse votes there will be a lot of feeling manifested until the Control Board has achieved some useful tangible results—and that cannot be until several months have elapsed. That influential journal, the Otago Daily Times, is frankly antagonistic and it deals editorially with the subject thusly:—"The provision in the Dairy Produce Export Control Act, in terms of which the measure will become operative only after a socalled referendum of dairy producers has resulted in a declaration in favour of it, still leaves it a highly objectionable and dangerous piece of legislation. It establishes a precedent, which will almost certainly be quoted in future in support of even more questionable assaults on individual and personal rights. The power of compulsion is embodied in the Act in order that all producers may be coerced to join the dairy pool. If the methods employed by the Control Board are successful in gaining better prices and more settled and secure returns, surely none among the producers would voluntarily choose other channels for the sale of their products. If, however, the pool fails to secure what its supporters promise, what little virtue might be claimed for the principle of compulsion becomes non existent. Broadly, however, it should be recognised to be the inalienable right of producers to market their produce in the man ner and through the channels which they find most convenient and profitable. The so-called referendum is confined to producers—defined as those who supply milk and cream to factories manufacturing dairy produce for export—but the principles contained in the Act affect every person in the community. It is the aim of the promoters to increase the parity price of butter and cheese, and it must be realised that the assurance which the Prime Minister gave to the Labour Party—and which according to the party's spokesman was

all it required—that the price of butter in the Dominion would not be allowed to go above the export parity has little real value. The Board may, and probably will, hold dairy produce for a rise which may or may not occur. When such a policy is being adopted will the selling price of butter in London control the local price, or will the anticipated or fixed price rule? A referendum of producers, even if favourable to the Act, does not convert a wrong principle into a right one." The preliminary arrangements are now being made for the poll of producers, but on present appearances this referendum will be a confused affair. It is provided that the roll of producers who will be entitled to vote will be made up from lists prepared by the dairy companies, and every supplier should see that his name duly appears on the roll. Accidents do happen in compiling rolls and maybe a whole bunch of suppliers may thus be disfranchised. We do not at present know whether completed rolls will be printed and made available for inspection, bu: if not each producer who does not receive his voting paper by, say, the end of this month, should promptly make inquiries as to the delay, otherwise he may well be disfranchised. Another point of importance is raised by the provision that the Act shall not come into operation "unless and until a majority in number of the producers. . . have voted in favour of it." This seems clearly to mean, though it will not have been so intended, that it v.iil not be by \ majority vote that the decision for or against the operation of the Act will oe made. The verdict whatever it may be. secured under conditions such as we have indicated cannot be entirely satisfactory. It will be seen that the whole of the provision rel :tive 'o the referendum is ill-digested and confused. It will not be disappointing to us if the effect of it all is to suspend for another year the operation of the Act and thus to afford a further opportunity for the consideration of the proposals embodied in it. Prices for primary products are on the whole, very satisfactorv, and it may be suggested that improved methods of a co-operative and voluntary character would have the effect of desirably stabilising the market. There is ample room for individual o fort in raising the standard of dairy herds and, if some expert opinion may bs accepted, there is room also for an improvement in the quality of the product. "Butter-making is a lost art," declared the chairman of directors of a northern dairy company the other day. He added that butter made nowadays was points below that made years ago. He blamed dirty milk for the deterioration in quality. If the condition which he criticised is at all widespread the effect must be to lower the general quality of New Zealand butter and to affect its price in the world's market. Every legitimate effort should be employed to improve the quality of the products of the Dominion and to find ready markets for them, but the danger of adopting short-cuts and devious methods may perhaps only be made plain by experience.