WORK OF DAIRY BOARD

Sun (Auckland), Volume IV, Issue 1008, 26 June 1930, Page 13

WORK OF DAIRY BOARD

! REVIEW BY MR. HINE I

DAIRYMEN SATISFIED THE SUE’S Special Reporter HAMILTON, Wednesday. What, in effect, was practically a unanimous vote of confidence in the Dairy Control Board, was passed by the National Dairy Association conference today. Following an address on the operations of the board by the acting-chair-man, Mr. J. Iline, in which he stated that the board had brought about an annual saving to the dairy industry of New Zealand of a shade under £500,000, between 600 and 700 delegates rejected a remit from the Baetihi Co-op. Dairy Company, which asked that the Control Board be abolished and that its work be undertaken by the National Dairy Association, almost unanimously, there being less than a dozen dissentient voices. Mr. Hine reviewed briefly the work of the board in connection with shipping, insurance, storage and marketing in London, and advertising with respect to New Zealand dairy produce. The most important and difficult work undertaken by the board, said Mr. Hine, was that in connection with the shipping of the whole of the Dominion’s exportable surplus. In this connection, with the whole of the industry behind it, the board had been able to arrange contracts which had resulted in an annual saving of approximately £60.000 a year to the producer of this country when rates ruling in 1924 were compared with those under the contract most recently arranged by the board. Apart from arranging and regulating shipments, the board, through its officers, supervised loadings and unloadings, thereby helping to cut down losses and increase efficiency of marketing. The speaker quoted several instances in which the board had been able to do much to bring about a reduction in handling charges on dairy produce loaded in New Zealand. OTHER SAVINGS Mr. Hine also referred to reductions which tlio board had been able to bring about in insurance rates and storage charges in London as a result of its being able to bargain for the whole industry. An advertising campaign in Great Britain was also being carried on with a view to popularising New Zealand butter with the consumer. In the sphere of research the board was subsidising work at the Massey College. The question had often been asked why the board did not undertake marketing for those factories which might desire .it; this could not be done without endangering the prestige of the board; to act as agent for any particular company or companies would be to risk losing the goodwill of the industry and might tend to revive the antagonism of the importing and marketing interests in London. “The present low prices are due to world-wide economic conditions,” said Mr. Hine in conclusion. If dairymen considered there was any magic panacea for low prices they were doomed to disappointment. New Zealand was not the greatest dairying country in the world; it ranked ninth in the production of butter, and seventh in the production of cheese. It could be seen, therefore, that it would bo futile to try to control world prices. In reply to a questioner, Mr. Hine stated that ho did not see that anything would be gained by a smaller board, not, at least, while the board had such wide powers. He did not favour an increase in the levy. In reply to another questioner Mr. Hine said the board had vessels available for all ports of Great Britain, but the difficulty was to get freights for outside of London. It seemed that merchants outside of London were not progressive in pushing sales of New Zealand produce.