DAIRY PRODUCE BOARD

Hokitika Guardian, 29 April 1930, Page 2

DAIRY PRODUCE BOARD

Mr J. H.ine, Acting Chairman o the New Zealand Dairy Product Board, has made the following state ment regarding the work ot th Board:—

.“Judging by the various comment: in the Press and at Farmers’ Unio. meetings, it would appear as if there was an attempt at organised propa gan.da for the purpose of beliltlui; the Dauy Board’s work, and disput'd suggestions tor its merger, it not abovtiCion, appjarin'g from .time to tune can not remain. unchallenged. :t is hardly unnecessary to reiterati the fact tiiat whilst always oppose:, to compulsory marketing and pric: fiixing, I have consistently maintains; that the Board was needed as a con tral organisation in the industry t attend to shipping with its main .problems, advertising, scientific research, marine insurance, and supeivision of dairy produce in transport and cold storage until it reaches the market. Dealing separately with the different phases of this work we .will first take shipping.

SHIPPING.

The Board took over the shipping contract in 1923-24 and the rates secured show finally a saving of £835,593 per annum, as between T,he dates ruling in .1928-24 and' the present rates of freight. Lot it be admitted frankly that 3ome of those reductions would have been secured to- the”industry in any case by reason of a. general fall in prices. However, until die Dairy Board came into being no organisation existed tiiat: \ i cjoulcl legally bind the industry to!jq'ldipping contract, or negotiate effectively with any shipping line other than those at present trading with New Zealand. Undoubtedly the legal power to negotiate is a big factor in securing the greatest reduction possible. Before leaving die question of shippi iy2j it. should be stated that for years’ prior • to- the iiiatigufation of . the 'Board ■ thei;e had been an insistent .'demand':for greater .supervision of shipping and transport. ’’ It was found this' service, as "ijiere wpfipllrtiacli’inery to provide for -the : -fcbst , being’bbrne equitably by all ■ dairy producers. The setting up of ;.cii.e Dairy Ijoaifd. problem, : £s('[sJie;fppa}{i jjs4?l 4bWj'iciu't of its levy rq provide the necessary inspectors. ■As it; result.it}je t hqpdlin.g of .dairy produce) 1 ite ’transport and.jCool storage, (sLmyja -better]hafiis .than ever before. (&vid«inbfil;>.ifi*} : of this lias been given;not only by the Director of the,Dairy Division,, but also % , many:prominent dairymen who have ' visited Great Britain ill recent years.

MARINE INSURANCE.

For years prior to the establishment ol tiie Dairy Board the Dairy Associations" had worked hard to ef : feet reductions in the cost of' marine insurance; but without any appreciable result. the reason being that they were unable to guarantee any given quantity of produce to the .Underwriters. The Dairy Board, becausoof its statutory powers, was albe- to offer the Underwriters the ' wliple of the dairy produce 1 being exported. The effect of this, was ~to enable t;he Board iii 1924 to make a contract of upjrine insurance oil export dairy produce which, along with the reductions since secured, means a saving to the industry of over £32,C00 per . annum. It'also made possible the securing of the best, marine cover that lias ever been in existence in New Zealand. Export dairy .produce is protected under this'policy from the time the milk or cream is received at the factory until thirty days after reaching its destination “against every risk whatsoever.” There is a condition in the contract which proves the value of the Board’s work and it is ■‘•■that this contract is subject to the Dairy Board continuing its inspection and supervision.” "t" '{■ A

COOL STORAGE,

In past years, again and again has the complaint been made - that;,;. the Handling of dairy produce in British ports bus been anything but, factory and that considerable, deterioration in quality resulted by reason oi these ' conditions. - The Board took this matter up and was able to so arrange that aU dairy produce would be landed and sorted in cool storage By reason of the Board being able to enter into a contract with the Cool Storage authorities overseas the cost of this was reduced by an amount which means a saving of approximately £25,000 per annum.

EOARD’S EXPENDITURE

The total ordinary expenditure of the Board for the year ended 31st July 1929 was £27;088 7s lid. From this should be deducted some £SOOO, paid to the Dairy’ Associations by factories in the way of annual subscriptions for doing the shipping work and which they now do not pay, leaving £22,088 7s lid. A Further, reduction of £2,479 should ,bo made for the Shipping Inspection work, which is necessary whether the Board is in existence or not, thus reducing the total to £19,609 7s lid. Against this take only the saving on marine insurance of £32,000 per annum, uhid) is entirely due to the Board, and the position is that the Board in,stead of being an expense to the industry is really responsible for a considerable profit to it, and that without taking any account of .the great reductions made in freight rates and cool storage charges overseas.

It is interesting to note that the value of the export daily product from New Zealand for the year ii .vhicli the above expenditure was incurred, was over £20,000,C00,

ADVEBTISING

The annual expenditure of £15,0C an advertising cannot in any way included in the “cost of the Board.

■’he industry has asked for years tintf advertising bo done, and it is nevei nore necessary than when prices arc low. . The Board by reason of its position has been able to establish a National brand for New Zealand dairy produce, and the."’bole of the advertising is built around this brand, '• th the object of establishing a goodwill for the whole of Now Zealand s produce. Advertising expenditure by others lias been allocated to individual brands, this being only natural in view of the fact that, the owners of these brands paid the cost.

SCIENTI FIC RESEARCH

Hero again there •was a direct mandate from the industry that its problems of quality should.be dealt with from a’scientific point of view, and the payment of some £4,00) from the Board’s levy for this work was a graiit long overdue and cannot by any stretch of imagination he included under “cost of the Board.”

GENERAL. .

There are number of other matters that could be touched upon, such as improvements brought about in the transport. ste’amers/. more .: cfirii'iDete statistics, etc., which have all resulted fi'oui the Board’s efforts; but 'enough has been written * to • prove that ; those who are featuring,, the “cost of the Board.’’ are doing so ill complete ign.oran.ee; of the position.-;

CO-OPERATION

It is well tc remind ourselves that the Board’s work and resulting savings secured and improvements effected, are in the interests of the whole dairy industry. Every supplier ; to .the smallest dairy factory in the Dominion receives . his share of the benefits obtained by the Board because of its, bargaining capacity. ‘ Larger or- a combination .of ; larger f|ctj>fii)?s| 'ifii|lbf obtjapi -a ■ure of these advantages, fmVtta rank and file would naturally Jbe left out. ' The strength, of fhe "Board’s work is that it ensures(jtp.pjyevyi fagtoyy that its interests : are protected.

The . fsreg_ci v i]g evidence. of ions activities ol the Board should he a sufficicMut • critiqs, and with'a full, knowledge ,of recent happenings ~1. hpve ] np, hesitation inlaying thgt' tjie .piaintenance' .pf , the Board as a separate entity, elected by the direct vote of every producer, was never more necessary to the industry than to-day.