Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

NEW ZEALAND PRODUCE.

REPLY TO MINISTER'S STATEMENT

Mr. A, Morton, president of the National Dairy Association, replying to Sir James Allen's defence of Mr. Massey at Palmerston during the recent show, Btates:

Sir James Allen states: "The remarks of Mr. Morton that Mr. Massey promised to discuss certain questions with the Food Controller, and did not do so, are, so far as my knowledge goes, incorrect, If the reference by Mr. Morton is to the question of insurances, then Mr. Massey did deal with it." <

I regret that Sir James Allen should have made such a statement on an incomplete knowledge of the actual facts, which are as follow: On April 24, 1918, the Dominion Cheese Committee waited on Mr. Massey, who was leaving for London within a few days from that date, and discussed with him certain questions in connection with the conditions attached to the Bale of dairy produce to the Imperial Government, and after fully explaining these questions to Mr. Massey they asked him to discuss them with the Food Controller personally, and endeavor to have the terms relating to the purchase amended so that in any future contract the conditions then suggested would apply. This Mr. Massey readily promised to do. On his return to the Dominion he was met by the same committee, and in reply to my question: "Did you discuss these mat' ters with the Pood Controller?" Mr. Massey replied, "No," without any qualification or any explanation as to why he had not done so. The question of insurance mentioned by Sir James Allen was one of the matters to be discussed. And yet after Mr. Massey said he did not discuss this with the Food Controller, Sir James Allen says Mr. Massey did deal with it.

Seeing that the matter of the committee's request was one of great importance to'the dairying industry, and that had the various points asked for been agreed to by the Food Controller it would have saved the dairy farmers of the Dominion something like £IOO,OOO per annum, the committee did expect that the Prime Minister would have done his utmost to get the Food Controller to agree to the amended conditions. To say that they were disappointed with Mr. Massey's reply of "No," is putting it very mildly indeed. The only possible explanation of his failure is put very plainly in his letter to the committee's official representative, written in London oil June 22, 1918, in which he said "I have a thousand other matters to attend to besides the contemplated sale >of New Zealand daily produce to the British Empire." In Sir James Allen's statement he endeavors to bolster up the position, which he has apparently already taken up with regard to the Equalisation B'nnd, viz., that the establishment of the fund was agreed to and approved of by the representatives of the dairy industry themselves. Sir James Allen should know full well that the dairy industry and its representatives have never approved of the principle which the Government laid down, viz., that the cost of equalising the price of local end export butter should be borne by tlie producers They have always contended that if butter had to be sold on the local market at less than its value for export, thea the Consolidated Fund should be liable to make up such difference. And because the Government failed to recognise the justice of this contention and actually commandeered butter at less than it cost to produce, and at even less than the price they themselves had fixed as the price tl>» factorieg should receive, the representatives of the butter companies agTeed to equalise prices in order that thi» flagrant injustice should not be perpetrated at the expense of those factories °upplying the local market. And now the Government, after having virtual!? compelled the dairy companies to adopt the nrincinlp nf equalisation, seeks to shelter itself from itn just liability !>v savin? thai the Industry agreed to the principle voluntarily, which is a gross iniustice and an absolute misrepresentation of the actual fact*.

Tinally, Sir .Tamea Allen makes sw allusion to the forthcoming general flection. Let me assure him that the Party, of -wliicti Mr. Masses is the leader, has had no more loyal supporter than I have been for the past thirty years.—l am, etc., ARTHUR MORTON, Rraidaitt National Dairy Auotiatlon.

Permanent link to this item
Hononga pūmau ki tēnei tūemi

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/TDN19190709.2.43

Bibliographic details
Ngā taipitopito pukapuka

Taranaki Daily News, 9 July 1919, Page 5

Word count
Tapeke kupu
726

NEW ZEALAND PRODUCE. Taranaki Daily News, 9 July 1919, Page 5

NEW ZEALAND PRODUCE. Taranaki Daily News, 9 July 1919, Page 5

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert