DAIRY AMENDMENT BILL.

Waipa Post, Volume XXIV, Issue 1576, 20 November 1924, Page 5

DAIRY AMENDMENT BILL.

Sir, —In last Saturday's issue of the Waipa Post Mr W. G. Macky resents it being said that the above Bill was not exactly clean, and he goes on to prove that the Bill was necessary for reasons he gave. I grant him it was, but he might have added other reasons —as “ Velvet ” put it, white elephants, etc. Re the term disloyal shareholders, I would ask, what makes us so? Let me state my own case. I never voted or signed for amalgamation because I had quite enough of socalled co-operation when serving the old companies, and knew that amalgamation was not in the interests of the small man and far less to his advantage. At the same time I received notice that amalgamation was unanimously adopted. I therefore had to send my cream to the new company as there was no other - convenient for me. As time went on I was allotted shares in this way. From all my season’s supply the company retained a larger sum than I thought they should retain, and then at last called it a bonus. From the said bonus so much was deducted for share capital. Then I commenced it,o receive proxies. If for a director I was at a disadvantage, because a director would need to have fifty cows; if for other business, I was at a still greater disadvantage because the big shareholder had just as many more votes and therefore could over-rule quite a number of small men. I also noticed that my shares are allotted under a heading not so favourable as other sharehold-; ers. Re co-operatives, I hold fully paid up shares iin two, from which I never received a bean; a third may call my shares up in full; a fourth wanted to make me some sort of a slave. Re clause two of the Bill, Mr Macky states that the N.Z.C.D. is not concerned with that part. No, the N.Z.D.C. would have us believe it was the National Dairy Association that fathered that clause; but we have our doubts, and perhaps it might yet be necessary to prove the origin of clause two. Regarding federation, Mr Macky makes short work of it in favour of the N.Z.D.C. He may be wise for his own sake or that of the N.Z.D.C. If federation came to stay and it was resolved by the dairymen of ithis Dominion that all factories should pay out on the Government tests, that tests and weights should >he periodically checked, and that the total amount of butter fat received daily or weekly should he made to balance with the amount of butter made, I presume a one man one vote poll would be taken, and a three-fifths majority more or less would carry the resolution. If so, the N.Z.D.C. would have its wings clipped. Further, if it was resolved by the producers of the Dominion that the rates of interest and exchange should be normal and not abnormal, and so on, the latter would be good for the N.Z.D.C. Therefore, why not put some ginger into things and go for your life? Speed into federation as you did into the Dairy Control Bill and the Bill under review. When you do so then say it has been fried, not just brought up at a conference and then dropped. True and able men must take the field before it will be tried. We have the men and have the money, Why not our brains we use, To fight the scourge we suffer from And gain what now we lose? I am, etc., SHAREHOLDER.