DAIRY PRODUCE CONTROL.

Waipa Post, Volume XXIV, Issue 1402, 11 September 1923, Page 8

DAIRY PRODUCE CONTROL.

! To the Editor. Sir, —The situation fn regard to dairy produce control is clearing. We have now a clear-cut proposal to put before the dairy farmers of Waikato, or, rather, of the Dominion. This must be treated as a Dominion matter—a national one. In the past there has been too much of the "North Island v. South" spirit. But a pound of New Zealand butter ,or I cheese sold overseas is Xew Zealand ] butter or cheese, whether made in I Southland or Auckland. If cheese is | held up in the South and goes Home in great quantities later, the resulting slump affects all New Zealand cheese—both that of Auckland and Southland. This dairying industry is so important nowadays to the Dominion that we must leave nothing to chance. For years we have been in the hands of the big combines which control all shipping to this country. Without this Act there is no body or organisation which has the power to 1 make definite binding contracts on j behalf of New Zealand dairymen. I With this Act the Dairy Board will I work in conjunction with the Meat Control Board. These two Boards J will have such a valuable freight to ! offer that, if our present shipping j companies will not give a satisfactory service at a reasonable price, the Boards can go to the great shipping centres of the world to make their contract. The combined shipping freights of the meat and dairy industries is well worth having, and many will compete for it. Without the Dairy Control Act, nothing can be done in this direction. Our present freights .on butter are 100 per cent, above pre-war. On : cheese we are paying 130 per cent. I above pre-war. We contend that 50 j per cent, above pre-war freights is a fair basis. This would mean a savI ing to the industry ot over £400,000 per annum. Then take marketing. If is necessary that as much care should be taken of our marketing as of our manufacturing. We are very careful of our milk and cream at the facI tories. Oar cheese and butter are j graded by official graders. By these means we are producing a first-class I article. Having got the quality, we I must see that we get a price for it I equal to the best secured by other countries, none of which produce a better article than ours. All London authorities assure us that if we provide a steady and continuous supply like Denmark, we can secure a price equal to Danish. Our supplies are now dumped upon the market when they arrive, although sometimes several big loads I arrive at the same time. Can you I wonder that New Zealand prices I slump under such circumstances? At ! times during last season there was 36s per cwt. difference between the price of Danish and New Zealand. During the previous season there was as much as 5Gs difference—that is, 6d per lb. difference in the wholesale price when there is no difference in the quality. Taking each shipment of butter last season and estimating on the basis of the difference in price between New Zealand and Danish on the date of arrival, we lost over £790,000. There was no reason for this beyond irregular shipments and lack of organisation. Some cheese factories in Xew Zealand know the difficulty they experienced in getting their cheese shipped in the middle of the last season. High prices were ruling in Britain and yet they could not get their cheese on to the market. Owing to this shortage of supply, prices rose unduly high. When the large stocks in New Zealand finally reached London. the market became disorganised, prices falling nearly 70s per cwt. from the highest level. By this means producers lost over £500,000 last season. Thus we get the periodical inevitable glutting of the market simply because at present the supply cannot be controlled. Individual factories cannot do this. In all the oversea markets speculators are ever ready to fill their pockets at our expense. There is nothing so favourable to them as these alternate gluts and scarcities. Only an intelligent control can remedy these conditions.

There is still much harping on the "compulsory" clauses of the Bill. But how can a binding contract for shipping be entered into if the produce is not available to ship? It is suggested that the producers will be rushed into something harmful or foolish. This is a reflection on all dairy farmers. Surely the nine producers' representatives will move with caution. They will be dealing with their own produce, as well as with the output of the Dominion. The meat producers have not needed to use any of their arbitrary powers. They have obtained all sorts of benefits without using compulsion. The Dairy Board will spend perhaps the first year collecting evidence, and not until overwhelming evidence has accumulated will there be any changes in existing methods. The Meat Board has disarmed its critics by moving carefully, and the Dairy Board will do the same. No honest traders—transporters or distributors —need anticipate any more disturbance than is absolutely necessary for the safeguarding of our valuable industry. Then there is the bogey of finance. Various agents and others have endeavoured lo delude dairy farmers by suggesting that there will be difficulties about nuance. This is quite wrong. Factories will receive advances against their butter and cheese just as they always have. The produce is d saleable asset and people will be clamouring to lend, or advance, money on it.. And they are not philanthropists either. Further, the stabilisation o! prices arising from the regularity of supplies will yield in producers a much larger return. The losses already quoted on butter and cheese, together witli the freight saving just mentioned], amounts 'to nearlv £1,750,000. This is equal to nearly L'id per pound butterfat. on last year's export figures. 'W« must i-ave effective national advertising, We have the highest quality goods; we must let consumers know. Several efforts have been mad. 1 in the oast to organise this, but

nothing really effective has been done on a national scale. Some refuse to bear their fair share of the cost, notwithstanding that they will receive a share of the benefits. At recent conferences it was decided to raise a fund to advertise our dairy produce at the forthcoming British Empire Exhibition. All factories were asked to consent to this. Some have refused to pay; many have paid; while others have assented on conditions. Under the Control Act. the Board would be responsible for the nature and expense of the advertising, and all would have to hear their share of the expense. It has been left to co-operative dairy farmers themselves to press for reforms in the industry. The shipping people and speculators object. Commercial interests are apparently against any change. We are now offered an opportunity of improving all the conditions in the dairying industry. We must sink our personal and individual interests for the good of the industry, which is national in its scope. As a solid body we must insist on regular shipping and improved marketing. If we get together we will also be able effectively to press for reduced carriage on dairy produce in the Dominion. While we are divided we can get no reduction; even on the Xew Zealand Railways the Meat Board secured substantial reductions for the sheep farmer. Dairy farmers can get together, and insist on being taken notice of. Nowadays we are simply ignored, or beaten because we have been tackled singly. We now have a chance of acting solidly in order to get fair treatment for ourselves, and some tangible benefits that will enrich the whole Dominion.—T am, etc., F.W.