DAIRY CONTROL ACT.

Waipa Post, Volume XXIV, Issue 1426, 13 November 1923, Page 5

DAIRY CONTROL ACT.

THE POSITION REVIEWED.

CAUTION URGED.

(By Telegraph. Press Association.) WELLINGTON, Monday.

In an editorial the Dominion this morning has the following to say about the Dairy Export Control Act: Some feeling appears to have been generated over the selection of candidates to represent dairy farmers in the contest for seats on the Board of Control under the new Dairy Export Control Act.

It was perhaps inevitable that there should be differences of opinion as to the men best qualified for election to the Board. In making the selection, however, those who had actively assisted in promoting the passing of the Act endeavoured to ensure that the different districts were each represented by the men most likely to command general as well as local confidence.

This was highly desirable, for those who favour this new movement designed to develop better control in the marketing of dairy produce have to face the fact that it is still subject to powerful opposition; and that if it is to be made the success hoped for it will require most careful and capable handling in its initial stages. An effort is being made by opponents of the measure to win seats on the Board. This was to be expected, and legitimate enough. Indeed, it is quite possible that some of those who originally opposed the introduction of control possess qualifications which in other circumstances would make them valuable members of the Board. What has to be borne in mind, however, is that in the experiment which is being embarked on it would be dangerous to introduce needless risks. Unless a board is elected with members in full sympathy with the objects in view, and who can work in complete harmony, it will be handicapped from the outset in its efforts. Some of those who supported the formation of the Meat Producers' Board have been inclined at times to be critical concerning its disinclination to lend itself to hasty action. It has been accused of moving slowly towards its goal. Yet it admittedly has done much valuable work.

In the case of the Dairy Export Control Board it may be found that it will require to feel its way with equal if not greater caution. In certain respects the dairying industry has been wel'l served by the various exporting firms and agencies, and the new board will no doubt find it desirable to make the fullest possible use of these firms and agencies when giving -gradual shape to its policy. It would be a great mistake to elect a board which would act in a spirit of hostility to those who have handled our dairy produce in the past. What is wanted ie a board composed of men who will take a broad view and seek to co-operate with the existing firms and agencies in gradually evolving a better system for the handling, control and marketing of our produce. The hot heads and extremists should have no place on such a board. In view of the overwhelming body of opinion amongst dairy farmers in support of the new Act, it is fairly safe to assume that the candidates selected on their behalf will be elected to the board. In such a poll as is provided for under the Act, "ticket" candidates, backed by powerful bodies such as the Farmers' Union and Dairy Farmers' Union, naturally have a substantial advantage over individuals who seek election without any such backing. This may at times result in the loss of the services of men well qualified to hold seats on the board, but on the present occasion dairy farmers will be well advised to follow the lead given them by their organisations. The outstanding fact they should bear in mind is that those who fought for and succeeded in getting the Dairy Export Control Act passed into law are likely to prove the most zealous in their efforts to make it a success.