WELLINGTON NOTES.

Hokitika Guardian, 5 June 1923, Page 1

WELLINGTON NOTES.

THE DAIRY POOL. ('OXTENDING FORCES. [Special To Tiie Guardian.] WELLINGTON, June 1. As the session of Parliament draws nearer the controversy over the “Dairy Pool” grows in interest and intensity. For quite a long time alter the withdrawal of the Dairy Produce Control Hill in the dying hours of . last Parliament the advocates of the pooling scheme had practically all the talking and propaganda work to themselves. They did not cease in their activities for a single moment. Every dairying district in the Dominion was canvassed and organised and almost every dairy farmer was urged to join in the agitation which was to win for him similar advantages to those said to have been gained by his neighbour the sheep-farmer through the instrumentality of the “Meal. Pool.” The campaign has been very energetically maintained and apparently has been attended by :t considerable measure of success. Hut during the last month or so some of the dairy Tanners of a sceptical turn of mind have been making inquiries on their own nceouir concerning the proposed “pool” and as a result are not eager to rush into the scheme without further information in regard lo its whole scope and purpose. Among these must ho numbered a majority of the directors of factories who were called together In Stratford last week in the expectation that they would side with the advocates of the “pool.” THE STRATFORD MEETING. The Si rat ford meeting, held in one

of the largest dairying districts in the Dominion and thoroughly representative of the industry in all its branches, was so far easily the most important event of the campaign. It was designed to give Taranaki’s approval to the Dairy Produce Control Rill nod to insure the triumphant progress of the measure on to the Statute Rook. Rut while the meeting was practically unanimous in admitting that there was room for improvement in flu l industry at tin's end, and ill the slopping and marketing, it refused b.v a substantial majority to extinguish the rights of the individual producer without fuller information. Mr A\ . Maxwell, the leader of the Opposition, so to speak, was assailed by the suggestion that he was representing the merchant exporters of the Dominion, and he met the indictment with a very spirited retort, lie had gone thoroughly into (ho question sincerely and honestly, he said, with the idea of preventing, if possible, any rash move that might cause disaster to the industry. He had not assumed that he knew the whole position himself. hut he had investigated every possible channel of information. Tie had asked mercantile people to meet him. and he had given them Ills views and had obtained theirs. Tf he was holier informed than his critics were it was not his fault. THE MEAT PARALLEL.

One of the chief arguments for the institution of a Dairy Produce Control Hoard put forward bv sneakers not so well informed as Mr Maxwell, was that the Meat Control Roald had been a huge success, saving the sheepfanners many thousands on charges and obtaining many move thousands for them in the way of increased orices. This pretty little story, which lias passed into a jest in the city, was nrmnptly discredited Lv the local miner. “The reduction of freiglTts,” it reiterated, “was in conformity with "onornl reductions all over the world, hronght about bv conditions obtaining nn both inward and outward freights. The increase in prices was due entiretv to market conditions, If not, why did the Meal Control Hoard fail to secure a similar increase in the price if heel.” Why indeed! As a matter of fact, while the price of New Zealand mutton increased by 31 per cent during the period between December 1 ill!I and October 1922, when the Meat Control Hoard was supposed to have wrought its miracle, the price of Argentine mutton increased by -10 per cent. During the same period the price of New Zealand lamb increased by oli per cent and the price of Argentine lamb by r>7 per cent. In the light of these indiisputable figures the miracle of the Meat Hoard becomes a rather sordid piece of sleight ol hand and is not going to help the proposed Dairv Hoard at all. THE ALTERNATIVE. The growing feeling among the dairy fanners appears to he that what they require is not arbitrary control by a body that might or might not he deeply concerned for their welfare, hut such improvements in the production. shipping and marketing as would give the New Zealand producers as nearly as possible the advantages that arc enjoyed b.v the producers of Denmark and Canada. Towards this end it has been proposed that a commission, consisting of two or three capable men should ho dispatched to the other dairying! countries of the world to make a thorough investigation oT their methods in the interests of the producers here. A commission ol this kind would he much more likely to render valuable service to the dairy farmers and the Dominion than would a duplicate of the Meat Hoard with all its costly equipment and ineffective ways. The creation ol nuothoi controlling body certainly should be delayed until Parliament has had an opportunity to learn what the one already in existence lias been doing. This, at any rate, is the view of a large body of dairy farmers in the Taranaki and Wellington districts, who are reluctant to abandon their present business arrangements and commit themselves to others which might not prove nearly ns satisfactory or. as some of them add, as enduiing.