NOT STRAIGHT BUSINESS.

Shannon News, 2 November 1923, Page 4

NOT STRAIGHT BUSINESS.

ELECTION OF DAIRY CONTROL BOARD. 'EMPHATIC PROTEST FROM DAIRY FARMERS. , NEW TICKET NOMINATED. The protest voiced on behalf of the dairy farmers of the West Coast by the “Manawatu Times” yesterday found an echo and endorsement at a meeting of the Dairy Farmers’ Union later in the day, when some strong opinions were expressed Regarding the methods adopted by the Advisory Council in selecting a “ticket” for the Dairy Control Committee. Wednesday’s proceedings in Wellington were described by Sir R. Cobbe as “not straight business.” It appeared the business at the conference had, been “cut and dried” before hand, and that any attempted action on the part of the Da‘iry Farmers’ Union, would have been checkmated.

There were present at yesterday’s meeting, Messrs. C. Parker, (Dominion president of the Dairy Farmers’ Union), O. W. Williams, W. S. Carter, J. W. Teale, P. J. Srqall, N. Campbell (Manawatu); B. Roberts (Wairarapa) ,W. H. Waterhouse (Lower Waikato), and T. C. Grace (Dominion Secretary). Mr R. Cobbe, Feilding, attended as the Union’s representative on the New Zealand Dairy Council. In introducing the matter of the. selection of members to the -DairyControl Board, the president reported at length on the visit of Mr Cobbe and himself to the Wellington Conference. \ The object of the meeting, he said, had been for the Dairy Council to select a ticket of nine members for the whole of the Dominion and to 'give a lead to the country. The farmers of New Zealand looked to the Council for a lead, as it was the body mainly responsible for placing the measure on the Statute Book. The meeting decided to select a ticket of three members for the South Island and six for the North, and both Mr Cobbe and the speaker had participated in the discussion. It had been there stated that the Dairy Farmers’ Union should have the right to nominate two men on the Council, and if this were agreed upon they would support the ticket providing the men nominated were of commercial standing. However, the meeting would not listen to ihis. “We did not definitely decide on anyone,” said the speaker, “but we wanted the right to leave a vacancy for two men to be nominated by this Union.” The meeting had divided into two sections —North and South —and' pie selection' of nominees had resulted in the members already published, viz:—-North Island: W. Grounds, KHokianga); W. Goodfellow (Hamilton); W. C. Motion, (Waiuku) ; H. p. "Forsyth, (Eltham); W. A. lorns (Martinborough); IC. Dalrymple'(Bulls). South Island: John Fisher (Otautau); F. Waite (Waiwera, South Otago); and J. R. Thacker (Akaroa). The speaker criticised the proceedings in detail and voiced his contentions as to the capacity, or otherwise, of the men selected. “NOT AS THEY APPEAR.”

Mi* Cobbe said one of the things he objected to very strongly was the remark of Mr Grounds that he understood it to be one of the functions of the Board to go back to the Meat Board system of election and do away with the straightout vote. This was a serious statement indeed, meaning that there was an understanding among the men on' the ticket that they would endeavour to get Parliament to amend the Act and bring back the undemocratic American system of election. “I just brought this forward,” said Mr Cobbe, “to show you that things are not as they may appear. Th!e Farmers’ Union took a great part in the election, and s it seems hardly fair that it was given such a good hearing, as compared with ours. Some of the members nominated are members of the Meat Board and to place them, on the Dairy Board would be interlinking the two institutions too much. I feel convinced, .however, that Mr Grounds was not a party to the nominations. Altogether, the business is not too straight.”

Mr Roberts then moved: “That this Union reluctantly decides to nominate members for the Dairy Control Board, as it. feels that certain members of the Council’s ticket are not truly representative of the dairy industry.” Mr Carter seconded.

Mr Cobbe pointed out that an endeavour had been made to secure a unanimous approval of the ticket, but the president and (Mr Cobbe) had refrained from voting, as they had no indication as to what the ticket was going to be, and as it did not represent the Union, they could not express an opinion. They, therefore, withdrew from the voting altogether.

INDEPENDENT ACTION. Mr Small said the T)£sy Farmers’ Union had done* more than any other body in securing the Dairy Bill, and he considered it should have worked independently, tl was incumbent on the dairy farmers of this country to see that they had a voice in this question, which so vitally affected their interests. They had to look to the future and even if they were not successful on this occasion, /they would show that they could still carry on and take an active part in the work, on which twelve months had been spent. "I am of opinion,” he said, “that we shall get support; there is nothing; surer. I don’t believe in ‘toadying’ to the body which has elected the men in the ticket." QUESTION OF C<SST. The chairman enumerated the cost of circularising the 56,000 producers, and said the postage and circulars would cost nearly £4OO. It was a moot , question who was to pay this bill. . Mr Williams said it would not be

necessary for the Union to spend a penny on any particular member who may be nominated for the Board — whether members of the Dairy Farmers’ Union orVnot. He advocated the selection of two members of the Dairy Farmers’ Union and approval of the remaining four outside the Union. Mr Waterhouse stressed the vital importance of the "Board And said" he did not like the way the'whole matter was being handled. Mr Carter said if certain alterations were effected in the present ticket, it would probably receive the support of the Union. The Auckland nominees would, he felt sure, receive the support of the dairy farmers in that province. MEAT BOARD NOT WANTED. ' Mr Roberts observed that, looking at the question from the broad point of view, the while thing was a challenge to the Dairy Farmers ’Union. The question of a re-organisation of the ticket should be considered, or as an alternative the Union Should nominate two members. They did not want any members qf the Meat Board on the Dairy Control Board. The chairman: “If the nominated members are to advocate a return of the old system of election, we could not support any of them." Mr Small: “The dairy farmers of New Zealand are looking for a lead in this important question, and we should make a stands—win or-lose. In the future, we will have power to elect the Board, and it is a pity we haven’t got it now. If prpperly organised now, we should be able to secure two or three representatives on the Board.

DANGER, OF A SPLIT. Mr Campbell said if the Union could point to any member of the Board objected to, let it do so, but the matter must be viewed broadly and the danger of a split avoided. They did not want to see the votes split arid the membership going to opponents of the Bill.

Mr Williams: “I.wouldn’t mind seeing some'of them there.” Mr Campbell: I should object •to the opposition handling the marketing as it thought fit. BRAINS REQUIRED.

Mr Teale objected to any member of any ohter Board being a member of the Dairy Control Board, for a member of the latter organisation would have to spend the greater part of his time in its service. He did not care who • went to ' the Board so long as he had a thorough commercial knowledge and was able jto look after the interests of the small farmer, for it was he who was ; to claim the interest of the Board. Very few farming organisationt of recent years had been* commercial sue-" cesses, and the very best brains available would be required to handle such a large industry. The resolution wa& carried. D.F.U. NOT A. PAR^Y. Mr Williams expressed a desire to make the point clear that members of the Dairy Farmers* Union who attended the conference at ■ Wellington took no part in the nomination of the ticket, as the Press Association wire led one to believe, otherwise. QUESTIONS OF FOBICY.

Mr Cobbe suggested that the provincial executive should call representatives from each branch to inspect the credentials of men prominent in the industry - and submit' suggestions for the nomination of candidates for the ticket.

The chairman brought forward the question of th'e ■ Government nominee to the Board; and Said it had ■ been suggested that no member of Parliament should be eligible 1 for a position. He thought this idea a good one, and moved that a previous resolution passed, bringing the matter before the Minister, be supported.

This was seconded by Mr Waterhouse and carried. tl was decided that Messrs. Williams and Grace draw up a policy embracing the attitude of the Union, and submit it to the; executive.

Mr Sinclair ■ wires as follows “Your statement< that I rnominated Messrs. Goodfellow and Motion as -candidates for the Dairy. Control Board is not correct. Mr Harding, of the Northern WairOa Dairy Co., and Mr Mervyn Wells, of the Cambridge Dairy C 6., were the mover and seconder of the resolution which was carried ' unanimously by the North Island delegates.**