THE DAIRY PRODUCE CONTROL BOARD.

Shannon News, 3 February 1925, Page 1

THE DAIRY PRODUCE CONTROL BOARD.

The first r'ull meeting: of the Dairy Control Board which is to take place in Wellington on the 28th. January is being looked forward to with great interest by the dairy farmers of the Dominion. The various statements iJ • yarding rumours of different kinds appearing throughout the New Zealand press of late are no doubt greatly responsible for such speculation is running high as "EcTthe probable outcome of the next meeting of the Board. Absolute Control. Rumour has it that a serious attempt will be made by some members of the Board to substitute absolute control. How and where this rumour originated would probably be difficult to say, altough much propaganda work and inspired articles and interviews have been appearing in a certain series of New Zealand papers. The condemnation of f.o.b. selling which has also been constantly made use of, is being interpreted as a similar indication as it is understood that a universal consigning policy, could not be enforced without bringing in absolute control.

Whatever may be the cause of such rumours, so much is certain that those members of the Board who favoured the institution of absolute control have been rather over anxious in their endeavours and forced the pace too much. Since these articles have appeared in the press, dairy farmers have freely discussed this matter and the general consensus of opinion among producers appears to be, that they are quite prepared to give the Board time and every opportunity to make good, but are not in favour cf ventures of a revolutionary and experimental nature. Blaming the Board. Nor does the present heavy slump in butter prices help to increase the prestige of and confidence in the Board. The dairy farmers are sufficiently enlightened to realise that New Zealand is the main . culprit for the tremendous accumulation of butter on the London market, and they frankly and freely blame the New Zealand Control Board for not regulating the shipping of dairy produce to better purpose. PA statement has been made -by one of the Overseas Delegates, which, intentionally or unintentionaly, created the impression, that shipping could not be regulated unless absolvtp control was first brought about. This, as has been pointed out, is obviously not so, and the best example is given by the Meat Board, which has been successfully regulating shipping under a system, of partial or limited control for a couple of years. Appointing London Representative. Another rumour which is being freely discussed is what Mr T. B. Wright, London manager of the New Zealand Co-operative Dairy Company, is to be appointed London representative of the New Zealand Control Board. It is hardly necessary to statu that such an appointment.wou'd, for many reasons be most unpopular with New Zealand factories excepting perhaps those in the Waikato district. Without questioning Mr Wright's abilities or integrity, it must be obvious that the appointment of a person who, in the past, has been the servant of a company that-produces a practically one-third of the country's butter, not counting cheese, must have many great weaknesses, Such an appointment would neither be fair to Mr Wright nor the New Zealand dairy companies as it must inevitably lead to misconstruction • and misunderstandings. Moreover, it-is absolutely essential that the members of the Board should jealously guard against any and every semblance of partiality and partisanship. The belief, even now, is gaining ground that undue influence and pleasure is being brought to bear by members from the Waikato, a belief which would certainly be intensified, if not justified, by appointing Mr Wright as the Board's London representative.