ABSOLUTE CONTROL

Nelson Evening Mail, Volume LXIII, 22 July 1929, Page 7

ABSOLUTE CONTROL

AS THE FRUITGROWER SEES IT (To the Editor) Sir,—Onco again, tho apostlo of alliod cominorcialism presents for public misinformation a column of distorted facts and false suggestion. No doubt the “unhappy taxpayer” is intelligent enough to realise that “The 1928 Committee” i? not a- philanthropic institution whose ordered purpose is the promotion of the ordinary citizen's welfare. To the fruitgrowers' at any rate, the conviction is well established, that the true sentiments of that elusive body, "The 1920 Commilleo“ are avarice; agd commercial control of the primary produce of Now Zealand. It is. well known' the overseas fruit shipments experienced delays during the post season, but the reason for this delay cannot be laid at the door of (lie Control Board. The harvesting of fruit must always be subject to more variation than other produce, and the attending conditions during tho 1929 season were wholly responsible. On the other hand, it is fortunate that the fruit was shipped through a central prganisation—the Control Board because; If private traders had charge one could safely estimate the difficulties of shipping bv multiplying the trouble by tho number of such engaged. It is also common sense to believe that snipping companies prefer to deal with one consignor rather than a dozen. Ihe writer of the article also suggests that growers are to blame in not giving correct estimates of crops. Well. Sir, I consider such a statement from an outsider as a niece of gross interference with what ho does not understand. Wo require no advice from “The 1928 Committee on growing our produce, nor, be it said, on marketing the same. . I might apply the same remark to his statement on cool-store conditions in Wellington. He may be assured, and also tho public, that the Control Board and also the growers, are more acquainted with any possible shortcomings than he can possibly ho. The organisation and attendant necessities are not by any means perfect, hut wo have full faith in our own efforts affecting the same. Where criticism is necessary, the growers will not fail to supply it and wo shall continue loyal to the Board so that we may retain this right of criticism. What opportunity would -private traders allow us to express our views? The merchants cannot serve us half so well and would most certainly charge twice as much for worse benefits. Apart from denying such members the right to enrich themselevs at our expense, can (‘The 1928 Committee” show, in what wav- the Control Board is injuring tho people df New Zealand? I think, Mr Editor, that one could prove the contrary by touching on the guarantee (apparently known as a subsidy). The .sum (11s) is practically eaten up in expenses, a goodly portion of which are spent in this country. This means that all workers and local traders are, ensured of payment for their services. Under present condition, all sections of the community have opportunity to share in this. Experience, of other branches of primary production proves that merchants handling, produce have a reputation for monopolising all the business of those whose produce they ship. It would appear, then; that the'existence of the Fruit Control Board is beneficial to the general welfare. The statement, that the shipping companies divested themselves of all responsibility is not true, hut no doubt the Control Board can make suitable reply to that. Tin's letter represents the views of a grower, not the Board, and may safely be taken a? a reflection of the general opinion amongst growers in the Nelson province. As warrant of complete faith in absolute control, may I say that there is not the slightest possibility of the Government losing £IOO,OOO or any such figure. The greatest call ever made on the guarantee was in .1926, when the Control Board was not in full operation. The main loss was made in one huge shipment, which had to be sold at a. loss in a glutted market, because a “private merchant” was too greedy and selfish to nermit discharge elsewhere. As all fruit is not consigned to the Control Board representative, ‘/freedom of trade will not be permitted to endanger shipments for personal gain. . Neither the growers nor the general public need be alarmed at such fantastic statements; the former at any rate, are not likely to be influenced in the wav which is fatuously hoped. “PROFITS FOB THE PRODUCERS. 18tli July.