Dairy Control Board

Hawke's Bay Tribune, Volume XVI, Issue 112, 29 April 1926, Page 5

Dairy Control Board

Election of Members BASIS OF VOTING DECIDED. DISSENTERS’ MEETING. (Per Press Association.) Wellington, April 28. The conference of dairy farmers and factory managers was continued in the Town Hall Concert Chamber this afternoon. Mr. W. Grounds occupied the chair. The Hon. O. Hawken was also present. The Minister of Agriculture, the Hon. O. J. Hawken, when asked by the chairman to address the meeting, said there was no industry so large or progressive as the dairy industry. That was largely due to the dairymen themselves. The meeting had been called to assist the Government in working out a system of election of members of the Dairy Control board. System or no system, the members 01 the board hud been 1 airly representative of ail districts up to now, but they wished to guard against any mistakes m future. ’Hie industry was a most important one from the Dominion point of view.

Mr. W. A. Veitch, M.P., moved and Mr. Sinclair seconded: “That this meeting of representatives oi diary companies expresses its emphatic desire that the members of the Dairy Control board be elected on tho democratic basis of the ‘single ward system/ six wards for the North Island and tlnree wards for the South Island, one producer, one vote. The motion, after considerable discussion with reference to “one produced. one vote,” being omitted, was put to the vote, the voices being about equal.

The chairman said that there would have to be a roll call, and the question of how the votes were to be counted was (raised. The chairman then declared the motion carried.

Mr. Sinclair, who had seconded Mr. Veitch’s motion, challenged the ruling, and called upon those who had agreed with him to retire, and a large part of the meeting withdrew.

Mr. Grounds said that what had just happened showed clearly that the business would never nave got past the basis of voting. RESULT OF DIVISION. Mr. J. R. Corrigan having demanded a division, scrutineers took a vote by roll. In reply to a question, Mr. Grounds said the motion would read as Mr. Veitch proposed it, but omitting the words “one producer, one vote.” The result of the roll call on the motion as amended was: For 773, against 35; total votes 808. Individual votes, said the chairman, were: Ayes 227, noes 9. Replying to Mr. Corrigan, the chairman said he thought there were 1149 votes on tho roll. TONNAGE BASIS OF VOTING. Mr Routledge moved as an amendment that consideration of the motion before the meeting be deferred until the conference had determined the basis of voting. Until the basis ot voting was settled they should not decide on the system to be used.

The amendment was seconded by Mr Fisher and carried with one dissentient voice.

Mr Routledge moved then that the basis of voting for membershix) of the Dairy Control Board shall bo on tho basis of tho export tonnage of butter and cheese on a sliding scale t>f one ton of butter being equal to two tons of cheese. He advocated voting on the tonnage basis. It was all-impor-tant to men engaged in tho dairying industry that they should have tho solo right to decide who should control their produce. They had heard a lot about the disfranchisement of suppliers, but it had to be borne in mind that the suppliers themselves elected the directors.

The motion was seconded by Mr Harding, who said the only sound basis was that those whom the suppliers elected as directors should Jiavc the right to vote. A sliding scale could be made to safeguard the rights of the small man.

Mr Corrigan supported the resolution. It was absolutely necessary that the people who provided the funds should have a say as to how the board should be elected. The only fair basis was the tonnage basis. All that was asked for was that every man supplying a factory should be placed on a fair basis of representation. DIRECTORS’ v. SUPPLIERS’ VOTE Mr J. B. Barnett (Linkwater) advanced the opinion that Parliament, having made a mess of things so far in respect to the system of voting, wished for some direction from this, conference as to tho lines upon which to proceed. Mr J. Dunlop CRimu) agreed to an optional but not compulsory vote of suppliers. Mr T. Moss (Newman) said that in listening to some of the stuff talked at the conference he felt almost ashamed that he was a factory director. It was most unfair to attack the directors, as had been done. His own suppliers had come to him and said: "We know nothing of this. How would you advise us?” What was the use if the vote was not an intelligent one? Cries of "Vote! Vote!” interrupted further would-be speakers. Tho question resolved itself into a motion in favour of the directors’ direct vote and an amendment for a compulsory suppliers’ vote. A division upon these issues resulted in the amendment being defeated by 558 votes to 212, the individuals in the hall voting 161 against and 67 for the amendment. The resolution was then carried on the voices. BOARD’S WORK APPRECIATED. Mr J. B. Gow (Coromandel) then moved: "That this conference desires to place on record its appreciation of the work done on behalf of the dairy industry by the Dairy Control Board and endorses its decision to bring into operation absolute control in August next.” Mr Routledge seconded. He said the chairman had stood up against an unscrupulous propaganda. The board hd saved the companies many hundreds of pounds. (Continued on next column.)

(Continued from previous column.) The resolution was carried with one dissentient. Mr Grounds was cheered as he rose to reply. Ho thanked all concerned for the assistance given him. There was no question as to the course of the board, and the fact that they were getting nearer to the task had not deterred them in their determination to sec through what the industry desired. He refuted representations that, he said, had been made against so-call-Bolshovik or Socialistic policy of the board. Developments had to be kept pace -with. There were dangers and the opponents of the board, who had been inflaming the public mind, would have to take care lost they create a more serious position by adding still another lire to those which had alredy been kindled. The board wished to serve the industry. When they had done that to the point desired they would be satisfied that the board had gained its point. It was decided that a committee place the resolutions of the meeting before the Prime Minister. At the conclusion of the meeting,.the chairman was accorded a vote of thanks and “For He's a Jolly Good Fellow" followed. THE DISSENTERS.

Those dissenting to the conduct of the meeting held a separate meeting, saying they had stood enough. It is claimed that the numerical force of the exodus was 83, and that they represented 113 factories, 31,264 tons of butter and 11,693 tons of cheese, 40 per cent of the producers of the Dominion. Motions v.’crc carried protesting at the mode of election of Mr Grounds as chairman, favouring the single ward system of election, each delegate having one vote for every butter and cheese factory represented by him. Mr Veitch was voted to the chair. The meeting endeavoured to arrange a meeting with Mr Coates, who said he could not see them until the other meeting had concluded. They will wait on the Prime Minister tomorrow.