Diary Control Bill.

Hokitika Guardian, 26 October 1922, Page 1

Diary Control Bill.

(Sohie observations oh criticism af thh Daisy Control Bill by the Ohairihan of the Dairy Council.)

It hits been suggested that tho Coinini ttee may ibe hdjfmig tw secure the Goveriimeiit financial.backing. This, we ihould have welcomed; but seeing difficulties iii tlib wajj we recognise that the indusbfy, if given control, can arrange its own finances in a manner that will he ai advantageous to all factories sniall or large as the present systanj. TliiS should he emphasised fliat the financial stability of the industry and its component parts will not be impaired to tho remotest degree. All connected with the Industry recognise that much requires to he done regarding shipping and that means must lie foiind to prevent the alternate gluts and periods of scarcity on tjie London market, which are the rosuß of our lack of system. A representative of a prominent London firm has said “If you c«in give a steady and even supply similar to Denmark you can secure an even price with them.” ] Yet over a period of six months during last season the average difference between New Zealand and Danish prices was 36s per ewt., the greatest difference being registered on January 16th j when it amounted to 65s per ewt. or 6d ! per lb., this notwithstanding that all | London Agents assert that New Zeai land butter is now equal if not su--1 perior to Danish. On this basis the 1 New Zealand Dairy Farmer should have received fully £1.000,0(16 more for his produce last year than he was paid. , which amounts, had it been spread throughout the country, would have done much to mitigate tho financial troubles experienced during that time, t None have yet questioned the need of a. sound intelligence department to 1 collect information and -supply to the factories. Assume this to be done j without control, what is the result? The information is obtained and is , distributed to factories that a certain ! market gives good promise - . Tmmcdi- • ately a rush sets in to supply it, with | the result that it is overdone and the ’.promised good market becomes a had one, your information is thus stultified. The soundness of your intelligence de- | paitment is then questioned by the j unthinking and becomes discredited, not. he it noted, because its advice was unsound, hut because it had not ! the power to control the supply that the market sought. Thus it comes hack unerringly, that seeking an intelligence department without a Control Board is chasing a will o’ the wisp sootlmt your information brings into play •forces that stultify your efforts, and must continue to do so. Consider also the question of advertising, the need of which, to open up new markets is recognised hv all. Widespread advertising may he only a waste of effort and money. Systematic advertising involves a readiness to immediately supply requirements as a demand is created, which supply must he steady and continuous, and in such volume ns the now market requires Factories which have sought to develop business in Manchester and other new •entres. have discovered the difficulties by which they are beset. Much has been made by the opposition of the proposed levy. This is required to secure the necessary information to direct our supplies into the most profitable channels, advertise and develop new markets etc. The whole of the expenses of the Board would lie taken from this fund. It is probable that one half of the maximum levy suggested—one eighth penny on butter and one sixteenth penny on cheerio would he ample. This would mean some £-10.000 per annum. As the agents at this end are at the present time taking about CBO.OOO as their share of the 2|% commission we have to pay on our sales, it will lie seen there would lie an immediate saving of some £IO,OOO per annum to tho industry with nil the development and security work thrown in. All the working expenses of the Control Board would he taken from I this fund. If those who are eonoentrating attention upon Clause 16 would read it as it should he read—“ All moneys received by the Board in respect of the sale of Dairy Produce (or hv levy) or otherwise howsoever” etc., they will see the need of ihe clause to provide for the effective working of the Act. The urgency for tho passing of fho Bill lies in the fact that we now hold a strong position on the London Market. We are now supplying 53% of its imported butter as against 20% in 1913. When Siberia, Argentine and other exporting countries-got again into their stride we shall ho subjected to fierce competition, which may ho disastrous to this country, if speculators are in a position to play one country against thu other lor their private gain. We believe this to he a vital point and no time should he lost. If the Bill were passed this week wo should need to set to work immediately to prepare for next season’s output il the work is tw he done efficiently. Now is the time to got it established; if wo miss it we may never he able to regain the same opportunity. In an endeavour to confuse the issue many unpopular words have bec*i used to stimulate opposition viz.—compulsion, coercion, arbitrary ete, whereas there is no need and no desire to go beyond the word used in the title. Dairy Produce “Control”. The word “Control” implies a power to direction the words of the Act the Control "•may as film Board determines ho ah- ( solute or limited” the fuller power ran only he exercised with tho consent of the Government. We have no desire to act arbitrarily, but as dairymen wo desire to place the industry upon a permanently better footing. It can ho doivo and flio way we suggest is the only possible way. We know that it conflicts with tho

interests of those who are engaged in the trade at this end, and can therefore understand their organised opposition to it; hut the issue cannot lie restricted to the interests of ft few. The whole Dominion both town and country is vitally interested in the general well being of the dairy industry and to all .such the general provisions of the Act should commend themselves.