DAIRY CONTROL.

Hokitika Guardian, 18 June 1927, Page 1

DAIRY CONTROL.

STATEAIENT BY AIR lORNS

WELLINGTON, June U

At the meeting of the Dairy Produce Board to-day a statement on price-fixing and the operation of the London oflice was made by Mr AV. A. Tonis, who for the past two years has .been on the Board’s London Agency. ‘‘l have been away from New Zealand for two years, stated Mr lorns, representing Hie Dairy Board, with my colleague Air Afotion, on the Board’s London Agency, and I am very glad to be in New Zealand again and to have this early opportunity to lay before you a number of matters with which. T think, you should be acquainted. I am not here to-day in any sense to give an account of my stewardship—that is not required but a certain amount of misunderstanding and consequent friction lias arisen during my absence, which, it seems -to me should be discussed at the earliest possible moment. Foilin' part. J want to do this without any personal acriiiionv and without any recriminations, though there are several matters I shall have to refer to with perfect candour. My first duty, us a member of the Board, is to the producers of the Dominion, and this cannot lie fully discharged without placing before them quite frankly the facts of the position. “Very shortly after my arrival in London T realised that any attempt on our part to cut- out any legitimate channel of distribution, or any medium between tbe producers and the consumers that already wa.s serving a useful purpose would he disastrous. This lias been demonstrated clearly enough by the investigations of the British Food Department during the Great War and by the failure of the prolonged and costly efforts of a great American concern to establish a meat monopoly. If any lurthor demonstration had been required it would have been furnished by our own recent attempt at price-fixing. Even tire poorest intelligence should have recognised Ahat bv attempting to cut out the brokers and penalising the wholesalers we were ostracising sections of the trade that had been in the business for many years t-> the great, advantage ol New Zealand producers. The adoption of this policy drove a number of operators into the arms of the Dominion's rivals, and immediately resulted in the lessening of the premium which had existed for New Zealand produce and the widening ol the premium, tor Danish. This dictatorial attitude on our part, opposed to all British methods, had it been prolonged inevitably would Iliavc driven the hig buyers in England to the formation of a 'buying committee.' which would have deprived New Zealand producers of the advantages of trade competition.”

Mr lorns then read a letter which the agents sent to the London Board, and letters received from several importers, wholesalers, distributors, and others after the announcement that price-fixing had been abandoned, and he continued:

“Of course, most of the expressions of approval came to me and others attached to the London agency verbally. Quite probably those members of the board and others who still cling to tho delusion that we could compel tho British merchant, distributors, retailers and consumers to submit to such terms as we eared to impose upon them if wo only hung on long enough, will tell you that the people who are rejoicing over tho collapse of price-fixing are animated only by the prospect of making more money for themselves out of 'the unfortunate New Zealand producers.’ 1 am not going to follow them in their reiteration of this silly story, but it is only due to the friends the industry lias at Home and to the personal friends we have made there ourselves to say that it amounts to nothing loss than a gross slander. I have dwelt upon this price-fixing episode at considerable length, not because T have any fear -of the experiment jbeing rtpeated in our time, but because I want its incidents definitely placed on record.

‘‘There are a number of more or loss personal matters which cannot he discussed in any detail in a statement of this kind and f can only indicate them, here its a subject for our early attention. I, never have been able to understand why the hoard has not paid more attention to the representations made to it by t-lie agency. The manager’s practice of consistently communicating with the chairman of the board and Mr Goodfellow, without even informing the representatives of the hoard of his intention to do so, caused an undercurrent of uneasiness. There could he no ‘team work' in the office under such conditions. There is a widespread feeling at Home that the administration of the agency in London is not altogether impartial, and that it is swayed to some extent by old trade associations. The appointment by the board of a. big: London firm ns its selling agents in the United States and Canada is quoted as a ease in point. This was the occasion of a good deal of irritation to otiher sellers 01 our produce. I say definitely that equality of treatment to our customers does not exist. There can be no ri-.’-n- 1 think, that much harm has been done to the interests of the producers by the publication of the ‘Exporter - newspaper under the auspices of the hoard. There is a. free Press in this country, which the whole world is commending, and surely this ought to he good enough for all of us. One of the large dairy companies in New Zealand had asked each of its agents to contribute C 250 towards the institution of the ‘Exporter,’ and the paper is now being used to further the ideas and interests of individual members of the hoard. These are some of the personal matters we should discuss, and it is obvious we should approach them without recriminations and with the single purpose of promoting the best interests of the producers, whom we are here to represent and to serve. ‘•I cannot conclude without expressing my own very high appreciation of the services rendered to the board by the Prime Minister, the Bight Hon J. G. Coates and the Government’s representative at the London agency, Mr Stronnch Paterson. I have read reports of criticism levelled against Mr Coates’s attitude towards the board while in London by members of the board and others, which I should like to believe to be misrepresentation of the speakers i words; but. as tjhey have remained uncontradicted, that satisfaction is denied me. The truth of the matter, which can be verified by any number of witnesses, is that while in London Mr Coates strove to the utmost to bring about a satisfactoiv settlement of the difficulties besetting the agency and the trade. He spared himself in nothing. He gave no thought to politics or popularity. The interests of the producers were his one

concern. Tho suggestion that lie sQiigJht to undermine the statutory authority of the board was simply an outrage upon truth and decency. No one in the circumstances could have borne himself with greater candour and propriety than tho Prime Alinister did. As for Air Paterson, the Government’s representative at the agency, I speak with a very intimate knowledge of this gentleman’s services when I say they were invaluable, not only to tiie agency and the hoard, but even more so to the producers. He always was courteous and precise, and vet nwnys insistent upon the rights of his position. ] have gathered since my return to New Zealand that sonic members of the hoard think it was the duty of Air Paterson to sav ‘Aye’ when the agency said ‘Aye.’ and ‘No’ when the agency said ‘No.’ Had that been tlie beginning and tbe end of bis functions they might just us well have been performed by a junior clerk from the High Commissioner’s Office. Afr Paterson took a very different view of his obligations, and on occasions, as I remember, insisted upon certain courses being followed in order that he might supply tho Government with information that was expected from him. He also thought it within his sphere to criticise fairly severely certain expenditure which was not in the interests of the producers. Objection has been raised here. I understand, to the Government’s representative introducing a deputation from the importers and wholesalers to the I Hnie Minister while that gentleman was in London. Air Paterson was asked bv tho members of tbe deputation to introduce, them to Air Coates, and when, ho asked me for my opinion on tjhc subject I told him. I thought lie was the proper person to perform the ceremony. I understand that, beyond introducing the deputation, be took no part in the proceedings. I was very sorry indeed to bear of his resignation. His business experience aiuf understanding, his knowledge of the whole business of the board and bis proved integrity made him the ideal man for tlie position lie occ-u----pio, and whoever his successor may be Ids services will be much missed.”