POSITION OF FREEZING WORKS

Evening Star, Issue 19786, 9 February 1928, Page 9

POSITION OF FREEZING WORKS

THE MEAT BOARD'S POLICY MR ADAM HAMILTON ADDRESSES FARMERS' UNION The policy of the Moat Board in its attitude towards freezing works was outlined this morning at the mooting of the Otago Provincial., Executive ol tin;' New Zealand Farmers’ Luton by Mr Adam Hamilton, M.P.., a member of the board. Mr Hamilton’s speech was in reply to an address on the subject given "at a previous meeting of the executive by Mr James Begg, and also in reply to a resolution passed by the Otago Executive to the effect that the Dominion Executive should be written to and requested to do-some-thing to relieve the financial situation of the freezing works, the position being. that the banks refused to recognise tire works as securities for advances. Mr Begg’s contention was that the action of the Meat Board in vetoing the transfer of certain freezing works and of having the right to veto i tho transfer to approved institutions had had the effect ot making the works a useless security as far as lending institutions were concerned. Mr Hamilton said that he appreciated the privilege of being able to attend the meeting, and to reply to the questions which were troubling the peopio down here. The Meat Board did not represent any particular province. The Farmers’ Union was a responsible body, and if it passed a resolution it carried some weight. When such a body passed a resolution there must be some good reason tor it. If tho farmers wanted anybody else but himself to represent them on tho board he was quite willing to stand aside, as long as it wns_ not a matter of policy. His own desire was to preserve the farmers’ interests, and he represented a farmers’ constituency in tho House. He had great laithin tho powers of the Meat Board, which since its inception had done much good. In the early years of the board drastic powers had to be introduced to cope with the various situations, and the e' ation of the Meat Board, in spite of adverse criticism, was the best that could be devised. Its main job today ' was attending to the grading and inspection of the meat before it was exported to England. Formerly the insurance rate had been exceptionally high, hut now they could get a policy for under £l, arid all damage had been eliminated to such an extent that an enormous annual reduction in costs had been brought about. Then again, the regulating of shipments was such that the produce could be landed Home in a manner as satisfactory as possible. They had recently bought a new site for cold storage in London, aiid thus one of the last remaining difficulties would soon be removed. With regard to the, board’s policy, he stated that in May, 1923, the board passed a resolution that it would look on (he purchase of works by overseas companies’ with great disfavor,, and would not allow transfers to go through without the consent of the board. This

action was pretty well accepted by all the companies. Then a Poverty Bay works Cot into financial difficulties, and alter a" great deal of negotiation the works were sold to Vesty; but the board bad always hold that the transaction took place without its consent. The second problem which came up as a result of tho resolution was the Wellington Meat Company, which had an offer to sell out to Borthwick. The board advised the Government against the transfer; the board refused to allow it, and the company, after being reconstructed, wont on quite satisfactorily. Considering that the mergers’ scheme was not advisable, tho board did not go on with it. Freezing companies were not the only tilings in New Zealand that wore in difficulties: there were many farmers and traders laboring under similar handicaps, and so it would not ho a unique cose for a freezing works to find itself in such a plight. Why should there be a merger? People were too much inclined to put their responsibilities on to commissions, and the wisdom of the merger scheme should have been discussed without a commission.

Did tho board’s policy hamper the assets of the companies? The board might be taking up a wrong stand in this, but it believed it was working in the farmers’ interests. There was another side to the question, however, for could not their policy also protect the assets of the companies. In fact, it did protect more than it destroyed, If it had allowed the Borthwick people to buy out the Wellington Meat Exporting Company Waingawa would now be in a bad way. Suppose Borthwick had the right to build a works in the south, say, at Mataura or Ocean Beach, what would the position be in respect to the farmers’ own works? The speaker said that the board was protecting the farmers, and that it did not tend to destroy. Tho union’s resolution said that something should be done. What should bo done? They had considered the mergers’ scheme, and had come to their own conclusion. If a local stock and station agency went out of existence, the ordinary law of competition was that other companies would benefit. Was it something extraordinary to transfer an asset, the speaker asked. No, he went on, the company was allowed to transfer its assets "without the consent of the board. It was exactly the same case with farmers and the Land Board. After all, had the board destroyed the assets by refusing the free right of sale? The hoard, except in the case of the W.M.E. Company, had_ never refused the right to sell, and this company, reconstructed, was in a sound position to-day. . , , x If the works got the tree right to sell they would not be in any different position. The board must stand by its resolution, and it would not be in the interests of the meat trade if it rescinded it. However, if the farmers of the province passed a resolution along any lines they wished the board would be only too pleased to receive it. The board believed that a hostile attitude was not in tho interests of fanners. At'a'public meeting the matter could be discussed further.