QUESTION OF MARKETING.

Taranaki Daily News, 26 August 1922, Page 7

QUESTION OF MARKETING.

NEW ZEALAND DAIRY PRODUCE. At the request of the chairman at the annual meeting of the Maketawa Co-op. Dairy Go., Ltd., Mr. R. W. D. Robertson, representing Andrew Clement and Sons, Ltd., who handled the output, had a few words to say on the question of marketing. In congratulating the directors on the satisfactory pay-out they were able to show in an admittedly bad year, Mr. Robertson pointed out that the directors had shown the courage of their convictions by placing their marketing in the hands of a reliable Tooley Street firm. The comparative results thej’ could show against any other marketing scheme was a complete vindication of their belief .that it was well to employ a cobbler to make a shoe.

Mr. Robertson briefly touched on some phases of the marketing problem, arid remarked that what New Zealand producers suffered from most was lack of authentic information regarding the actual manner and conditions under which the -produce was marketed. Much misconception existed, and even the Prime Minister recently showed he was not free from this by stating in Parliament that he had been informed, and believed it to be true, that the London market for dairy produce waa controlled by a small committee of Tooley Street merchants which fixed prices daily. There was little use in combatting these kind of statements in New Zealand, when even the Prime Minister accepted these unconfirmed statements without reserve. There appeared to be a strong movement in progress to influence the opinions of producers generally in favor of pooling and control schemes, and one sometimes wondered whether these movements were based on a genuine desire for the producer’s welfare, or whether the significance was only political. Speaking as a producer himself, and with some knowledge of the British conditions, he viewed with very great alarm the direction in which some of this blind leadership was trending. As an illustration, Mr. Robertson stated that following after war decontrol New Zealand found itself in the proud position of producing the most popular butter imported into Britain. This had been achieved on quality merits plus Imperial sentiment, which had since been so successfully exploited by the importers that New Zealand had replaced Danish to an almost undreamed of extent, especially in the North of England and in Scotland. Briefly put, the British provision retailer had taken New Zealand to his heart in preference to the Dane, only to find that his oversea brother lay awake at nights devising Government approved schemes wherewith to artificially control supplies and exploit prices at the expense of his British buyer, namely, the consumer. Now British trade of all kinds has been*built up on the free play of economic forces, resulting in increasing efficiency and the survival of the fittest. Any movement or scheme to check these forces was resented more keenly so a<s a result of the bitter experience under Government war control. When therefore the proposed New Zealand pool was first mooted the retail provision trade became resentful at once, with an immediately perceptible drop in the popularity of New Zealand. Latest mails advise that since the dropping of the pool scheme the trade was wondering what would be the next surprise New Zealand producers were preparing to spring on them, and as a result of this uncertainty and suspicion were turning to other sources of supply where free trading conditions would likely remain more stable. The Danes were jubilant at the turn of the ' tide and were making the most of the opi portunity to recover their position. This ■ illustrated the danger of interfering with i trade forces without complete understand* I ing of the consequences. Mr. Robertson ■ freely admitted there, were weaknesses in i the existing system of marketing, but these i could never be improved by antagonising ! their British buyers. No trade could prosper unless the buyer, | as well as the seller, was a party to and j had an equal say in the dteal. On the | contrary, much good might result through i consultation and collaboration between the : New Zealand producer and the Britisn i trader. This had been suggested from London, and it had been urged that the New Zealand Government should appoint a commission to take evidence in New Zealand and in Britain on the whole question of production and marketing of produce and the best methods to be adopted to improve and extend the industry. Such a commission would gather full information as to the best methods adopted everywhere for marketing as well as for producing. If well handled it would be able to report on a constructive policy that would not only get over any British shortcomings, but would also do much to remedy the glaring lack of co-ordination of producing, transport and distributing interests that were daily becoming more evident in New Zealand.

As a matter of fact if such a commis1 sion started its labors in New Zealand on the same lines as the Meat Board,* it would find a richer field and would confer incalculable benefit on all sections of the New Zealand dairy industry. There were many questions such as standard overrun, uniform system of presenting balancesheets and suppliers’ returns, the handling,, stowage i*nd regular shipping of produce, the part skimming of cheese and many other commercial and technical problems which were vital to producers and which an independent authority might well investigate. The personnel o( such a comipission, while strongly representing the primary producer, should, however, include representation of the financial, technical, transport, and commercial interests. Mr. Robertson finally expressed the view that this proposal seemed the safest and most practical way of laying the foundation of any real improvement in marketing, and would at least be a more dignified way of drawing attention to disabilities as compared to the almost hysterical ravings against the British trade which had characterised so much of the recent New Zealand discussions on marketing.