RE DAIRY PRODUCE CONTROL BOARD

Taranaki Daily News, 19 September 1922, Page 7

RE DAIRY PRODUCE CONTROL BOARD

(To the Editor.) Sir, It was with great interest that I read the report in Friday morning's issue of your paper of the meeting of the Dairy Company delegates at Wellington on the previous day. Even though it appears that most of those present attended wedded to the idea of adoption of the resolution passed, that was no reason why there should be such an absence of fair play and of the right usually allowed by gentlemen to one another to state their views at such a (meeting although their views were diametrically opposed to those of the others present. I happen to be a dairy producer, and a supplier of the Ngaere Co-opera-tive Dairy Factory. I have read the various reports, correspondence and discussions that have taken place in your paper and our own local paper during the past few months, but I cannot claim that even yet I have a clear idea of the exact nature of the predent scheme for the control of our dairy produce. It may be that I am somewhat slow in the uptake, but I think one could claim that there are many hundreds, if not thousands, of other producers who have not had the scheme properly placed before them and who yet are vitally interested in its adoption or rejection.

Mr. Hawken, in his statement, mentioned that "there was little difference between the Meat Board and what was proposed at the present Dairy Conference,’’ but I am afraid that we dairy producers have not taken the exact notice that perhaps we should have of the terms of the meat control. At a recent special general meeting of the Ngaere Cooperative Dairy Company I asked whether there was any explanation being made by our directors as to dairy produce control, but was informed that the scheme was dead and that there was nothing to report. Our chairman undertook, however, that the company would not be committed to the scheme without the shareholders being first consulted. We have had no meeting since. I consider the Hon. Nosworthy's snub to Mr. Frank Ranford (chairman of the Stratford Company) quite uncalled for. I take it he was there to gather information to lay before his shareholders. Mr. Nosworthy says the Government will be guided by the resolution of the conference, and now it appears a very Important piece of legislation, vitally affecting the dairy producers, Is to be rushed through without the producers being consulted. May be I am wrong in my surmises. In how many cases have the directorates represented by the delegates now at Wellington consulted their shareholders befora adopting this scheme at Wellington ? Or are we shareholders to be consulted before the proposed empowering Act is put through the House?

Mr. Hawken also mentioned that “a feature of the meat control was unity, and allowed no tinkering with local markets.” Mr. Adam Hamilton, M.P., said: “If the dairy produce control adopted the same principle (that is, that of the Meat Control Board) he presumed the board would work on the basis of factory output, and possibly it would not be necessary to have other sections of the community represented.”

Mr. D. Jones, M.P., in speaking of the meat control, said - that there must be a penalty if a meat company refused to give control over their meat. Could you, Mr. Editor, give us a clear and concise statement in your leading columns of the exact nature of the proposed dairy produce control, "its extent, that is as to whether it is to affect produce that may be sold by dairy companies within the Dominion, for consumption by the people in the Dominion, as well as produce to be exported for consumption overseas, and also what would be the powers of the proposed board? Such a statement, I think, will be very welcome to many in this province in addition to the writer. Thanking you in anticipation.—l am, etc., PERCY THOMSON. Stratford, September 15.