THE DAIRY POOL

Taranaki Daily News, 10 June 1922, Page 5

THE DAIRY POOL

REJECTION BY SOUTH ISLAND, STRONG OPPOSITION MADE. VIEWS OF MR. T. C. BRASH. By Telegraph.—Press Association. Wellington, Last Night, In reply to questions regarding the decision of the South Island Dairy Association against, the adoption of the proposals for the control of the marketing of dairy produce, Mr. T. C. Brash, secretary of the National Dairy Association, said that owing to the opposition in the South the producers did not have an opportunity of hearing the proposals properly explained. A special committtee of the South Island Association was set up to consider the matter, but the committee made a noncommittal report, setting out details of the control proposals to the meeting of the Association after the North Island delegates, who were present by invitation, had spoken. A second report was submitted giving the real opinions! of the committee and this report, while admitting the need of improvements in the marketing system, was of a most destructive nature.

Mr. Brash added: “It is a thousand pities that facilities were refused to the promoters of the control organisation to explain the proposals fairly and squarely to all concerned. A barrage had been set up in the South Island against the promoters and thus the producers had not a proper opportunity to judge the merits of the proposals. Although four-fifths of the delegates at the meeting in Christchurch had instructions to vote against the proposals it was clearly evident that a great number of them, after hearing an explanation of the scheme, would have liked to again discuss the matter with their codirectors, for most companies had only one director present at the annual meeting. Such an opportunity was not granted and the voting had to be done in accordance with instructions. In these circumstances the result of the voting was a foregone conclusion.

“Finally, there is a note of insincerity in No. 2 report of the special committee. It admits the need of improvement in marketing conditions, but it has offered only destructive comment on sound proposals for that purpose, and has not given any constructive help. The committee also suggests that the proposed arrangement should be submitted to the various dairy factories in full outline, but the fact remains that the promoters of control were practically kept out of the various districts within the scope of the South Island Dairy Association.”