WELLINGTON’S MILK

Dominion, Volume 15, Issue 75, 21 December 1921, Page 3

WELLINGTON’S MILK

POSITION OF THE NEAR-BY FARMER CRITICISM AND A REPLY On the somewhat involved question of the city milk supply, and in particular that aspect of it which concerns tho nearby fanneri who, under license, may vend his milk in town without putting it through the City Council's clearing station. Mr. A. W. Parton writes as follows

“Before giving an expression of opinion on what I doom a very important factor in connection with the municipal control of our city’s milk supply, I want to say that Councillor Norwood and his Milk Committee deserve our very best thanks for much labour and painstaking endeavours to benefit the city as a whole. I personally have admired their work, and I feel sure they will not resent constructive criticism. What is known, as the thirty-gallon man, bedng the small farmer who is permitted to produce anu deliver within the area over which tlie committee have jurisdiction, could ultimately contorl the price of milk and render it impossible to conduct the depot on a reasonably low ratio of expense. At present I understand dairies are licensed to sell mjlk, and if these firty-eight delivered their thirty gallons daily to the city it would mean more than a third of the total consumption. Put another way,, it only means twenty-four ■ more such places, and over 50 per ceni. of the supply would not go throwzli the depot. I inalce bold to fay that tho committee, through keeping the price at Bd. per quart, are specially catering for the increase of these suppliers, because they get the full 2s. Sd. a gallon for the majority of their milk, while the farmer who sends his milk to the depot is getting approximately 10d. I know these men do not cater for very much winter milk; they do not need to under present circumstances; they can afford to cut out the drudgery of the work during that season. We are handing to every such supplier of thirty gallons per day delivered in the city, under this scheme, close on .£2O per week over and above what the supplier fo the depot is paid. The difference between lOd. and 2s. Bd. is 22d„ multiplied by thirty being gallons, and result by seven for days, the total is <£l9 ss. Now, some of these suppliers can be families of father one license, with separate dairy, mother ditto, and son ditto, all separate now for the purpose of evading the requirements to supply the depot. What a gold mine, and at. whose expense, Sir?—chiefly the baby and our growing children. No greater sin has been perpetuated on our future citizens by anv committee of councillors than this. Dear milk is worse than dear butter, dear,meat, or fish, and now we hear that }d. per pint represents .£lO.OOO during twelve months, then Id. per pint represents .£40,000, either profit or loss.

"The council are paying 10d. and sellat 2s. Id., a difference of 15d., and it was stated in a recent report tlfb costs per gallon of working expenses were fil'd 1 ., leaving 11LI. as clear profit on 5000 gallons, or J 3240 per day. or <£87,000 per year. Can I ask you, Sir, what is going to be done with this monev, and are we still to pay Bd. per quart, while it i’ fid. at the Hutt. sd. in Mnsterton. and the small supplier cripples the scheme by gradual increase in his numbers, for he has protection by Parliament in this work.” MR. NORWOOD IN REPLY.

On perusing the above letter, Councillor C. B. Norwood, chairman of the Milk Committee, said:--"I have no doubt your correspondent is actuated by the best motives in his endeavour to place information before tho public relative to the trading of the milk department, but I do think that Mr. Parton would have been assisted in his effort had he taken the trouble to investigate the figures more closely. Your correspondent’s figures do not represent anything like a true computation of the position of ’.he City Council’s milk department. Mr. Parton need not be worried concerning what are known as the thirty-gallon men, who are privileged at present to farm and deliver milk within the city. Mv committee’s policy was to permit the thirty-gallon producer within the city area at the time the scheme was mooted to carry on, because they saw nothing against the interests of the public in milk produced in near-by farms being immediately delivered to the public. However, when the Bill came before Parliament, the Bills Committee yielded fo the advocacy of vested interests to the extent of adding a radius of two miles to the rural territory beyond the city’s boundaries, that two miles lo be maintained irrespective of any alterations in the boundaries of tho city by expansion or otherwise. That was altogether against the policy of tho committee, because it gave privileges to farmers at a. distance who could not comply absolutely with the conditions set oui by the committee as to milking and immediate delivery fo tho consumer. That it did impede the commercial policv of tho council is obvious, but the clause was adopted by Parliament, nnd we have to make the best of it under the circumstances. Ratepayers need not be worried in the slightest degree, as we arn only licensing bona-fide, dairy farmers. It is not possible, as your correspondent suggests,- for the farmer, his wife, and the members of his family to hold separate licenses. The fact that competition is not seriously felt, and that each month more milk and cream is being put through the station than during the corresponding period of last year, appear to provb that contention.

"Your correspondent fixes the price that the council is paying t'he farmer nt lOd. a gallon. It is a little difficult to know how he arrives at that, as we have no knowledge ourselves as to what we will pay. Our payment for milk is based upon the market value of butterfat, as discovered by the best and most economically-run factories within a radius of 70 miles of Wellington, plus 2 J ,d. per gallon to cover registration and the farmers’ end of the transport. There are also transport charges to be paid by the department, and all have to be added before the price is assessed at the season's end. At least three moderatesized factories have sold their total season’s output at prices ranging from lOjd. to Hid. per lb. (for cheese). This will mean to the suppliers of those factories a payment of about 2s. per lb. for butterfat. The fact that these companies have sold their output does not necessarily fix the amount the council will have to pay. It is, however, conceivable that th© price of milk products will stiffen up materially between now and the end of the season, and it is upon the results obtained that the ultimate price the council will pay for its milk will bo based. To that must be added the concessions to consumers during the winter period, which amounted to .£14,000. At Thursday’s meeting the council agreed to reduce the price of milk to 7d. per quart, or by 4d. per gallon. That means that Wellington will be getting its milk for Id. per quart less than Auckland consumers are paying at the present time, yet the conditions for jiroduction and marketing milk in Auckland are ideal compared with those in Wellington. This should be regarded by the public who ar© able to throw their minds back a year or two as highly satisfactory.”