DAIRY POOL.

Taranaki Daily News, 23 September 1922, Page 7

DAIRY POOL.

TARANAKI OPPOSITION, PROTEST TO PARLIAMENT. DELEGATES TO GO TO WELLINGTON. FURTHER MEETING TO BE CALLED. Some three dozen representatives of Taranaki dairy companies assembled at. the Soldiers’ Club, New Plymouth, yesterday, m response to the invitation of Mr. E .Maxwell for a meeting of those opposed to the proposed Dairy Produce Control Bill, which is coming before Parliament. Mr. W. JGray, Okato, was appointed to the chair, and lengthy speeches were made by Mr. Maxwell against the proposal, and by Mr. J. S. Connett, who is in favor of the pool. The general feeling of the meeting was that the proposals had been rushed through with undue haste and that insufficient time had been given to the factories to discuss them or appoint representatives to the Wellington conference. The opinion was expressed that those opposed to the pool had not been given a fair hearing at Wei lington. The upshot of the meeting was that a Parliamentary committee is to be asked to take evidence on the matter before the Bill is passed, and to that end delegates were appointed to go to Wellington to represent the views of those opposed to the Bill. In the meantime it is hoped that copies of the draft Bill will be made available for discussion by dairy companies, and another meeting is to be held in New Plymouth of representatives of all the companies to discuss further action. In his opening remarks, Mr. Gray said they all knew that this question of a pool had long been under consideration. At the last meeting which had been held they had considered it had come to an end, but it appeared to be still going on. There had been a conference lately in Wellington for the purpose of renewing that old proposal, and he understood that the Government had said that if the farmers wanted it they could have it. He then called ou Mr. Maxwell to speak. VIEWS AGAINST SCHEME. Mr. E. Maxwell (Rahotu) said that the meeting had been called at the request of a number of the producers so that opportunity would be given to those opposed to the pool to express their opinions and take steps so that their views could be placed before Parliament. Other meetings had been called at different times to consider the old proposal and tbe revived proposal, and they did not think that reasonable opportunity was given the opponents of the scheme to consider it. They had no voice in the matter, and those not entirely in favor of the pool had to get together and arrange a programme to get their views before Parliament. He did not know whether it was necessary to go into the matter, but he thought it would be better if he touched on some salient features of the Bill and the situation. He would deal with the main things which struck opponents to the scheme. The first point he desired to emphasise was that owing to the organised opposition to the previous pool they were given a distinct statement that the pool scheme was abandoned. They took that as a reliable statement of the position. Quite recently, without any previous intimation to the producers, favorable or otherwise, that the scheme was to be revived, the matter was suddenly brought forward by a notice issued in Wellington calling a meeting. That notice reached some of the companies, but others had not yet received it, but, in any case, the notice was entirely inadequate. The notice said that factories were to appoint a representative to go to Wellington. The time left between the receipt of the notice and the meeting made it absolutely impossible for more than a few factories to meet. They could not consider the merits of the proposal because it was not before them, except the name, and that it would be somewhat similar to the meat pool. DETAILS NOT GIVEN. Therefore the factories could not reasonably, as business men, appoint representatives to go and set up something that they knew nothing about. He was simply putting the contentions of those who considered they were entitled to a further hearing. It was quite impracticable for any but a small number of the factories to be represented at Wellington. Out of 500 factories in New Zealand the total votes cast were 157, both personal and proxy, and it was quite clear, therefore, that the meeting in Wellington was not representative. Further, it was not possible for any factory to give power to the representatives to act. Th tit was proved by the fact that a committee was set up ny the meeting to draw up details. When any important measure or any revolutionary change in the system dealing with any branch of their industry was contemplated all the people interested should be given the details, and he felt that the everyday farmer should know what was being done. (Applause.) The committee which was appointed drew up the proposals which were now presented in the form of a Bill. A voice: We won’t have it.

“It is questionable now,” Mr. Maxwell continued, “whether it is possible for us to raise any effective opposition. This is a matter dealing with procedure and we protest against any important measure, especially any important proposals of this sort, being rushed through with such undue and improper haste. We consider it a right for any farmer to have every possible opportunity of considering the proposals in full detail before they are given legislative effect.

“It is not in the province of the Government, and not right for the Government to take control of anything unless it is for the general public good and for the good of the State.” Mr. Maxwell defended the war legislation because it was for the good of the public at that time, and any legislation against any combination which was injurious to the general public welfare and was a distinct menace, as in the case of meat rings. “In this case,” he went on, “it was perfectly proper that the State should step in and endeavor to remedy an existing evil, and I suggest that there is no right for the Government to interfere with your industry unless the conduct of your business is such that you interfere with the welfare of the State and become a menace to the community. I distinctly state, without any fear of reasonable contradiction, that there is not one tittle of evidence of any combination against the- interests of the dairy producer. Still, we get reasonable prices and I have absoluttpositive evidence that for considerable periods of the year our butter has been selling at up to and nearer to the British retail price than was allowed by the Board of Trade in New Zealand.” ACTION UNWARRANTED.

If they studied the markets, and allowed for the fact that their buffer was salted, a comparison with the prices received for other butters would show that there was ,210 serious discrepancy. lu fact they had

been astonished at the nearness to the retail price. ’ He was hot attempting to say that there were no evils; there were serious evils at this eud and there may be some at the other end, but, on the average, their produce was receiving fair and reasonable treatment, and there was no warrant for the Government to take action. He said there was no public warrant for the Government to say that they should farm their farms and hand over the produce for a board to deal with. (Applause.) There was no public menace in the dairy market at present. “Summarising the position,” continued the speaker, “the thing has been unduly and improperly rushed forward after we had been assured that it was dropped. The rush had been so great that there had been no practical opportunity of getting the views of the producers themselves, or giving them any proper details of forming an opinion.” Mr. Maxwell then referred to the draft of the Bill, stating that a board of nine would ibe appointed by the Governor-in-Council for three years. That board would have power to appoint officers, who would probably be civil servants, and set up London agencies, who would appoint other agencies and servants as they might choose. The board would be responsible to the Government, who might take partial or absolute control of the export of dairy produce, to ship, sell, and distribute under control or. direction. A voice: What about finance? CHARGES ON PRODUCE. Mr. Maxwell said that the Bill provided that the maximum charges for administration were 1/8 of a penny for butter and 1/16th of a penny for cheese per pound. These charges were purely for administration. Continuing. Mr. Maxwell contended that a great deal of the time which had been devoted to discussion on the pool at various meetings had been spent in vilifying the present methods of trade. He defended the English houses, which, had built up big organisations on their integrity, which was of the highest order. He scorned the idea that the merchants who received a shipment of dairy produce half on sale and half on consignment juggled with each lot in order to affect the market. It was in their interests to get it all on to the market. There was no man who could set the market and no board could do it. There was the law of supply and demand Mr. Maxwell said it was suggested that the produce was rushed on the market and sold, and that they should stabilise the market. If the produce was there the market would come down, no matter whether it was offered or not, and if they held it over the market would drop the following week. The essence of good business was a clean market, and as soon as they interfered with the law of supply and demand they would have conglomeration and trouble. Their protest was against the methods which ha l been adopted by the committee set up to draft the Bill, the undue haste, and the State control of their farms when there was no warrant for it. Further, there was no evidence that they had been robbed. They all knew that there were improvements to be made in the trade, and greater evils existed at their end than at the other. (Applause). Mr. Maxwell went on to speak of the endeavors of one man to get the control passed, and contended that if the measure came into force most of the produce would go through the houses which at present handled his output. He considered that with all the vilification that had been heaped on the English houses, they would turn round and say that the New Zealand trade was only a fraction of their total, and that they could take it away. Where would they be then? He urged that they should organise throughout the Dominion to get their views before Parliament before the Bill became law. Mr. Sorensen: We were told that the pool proposal was slain some months ago. Who authorised these men to revive it? Mr. Maxwell: Themselves. Mr. J. O. Taylor said that these people were quite entitled to make a pool ot their own, ibut they had no right to make it compulsory for others. If a resolution was sent to the Premier and to the Minister of Agriculture there was no reason why the pool should be made compulsory. He would never consent to the pool in any case, and it was absolutely unjust to compel others to come in. SUPPORTER OF THE POOL. Mr. J. S. Connett, who is a Taranaki representative on the council set up in connection with the pool, was asked to speak, but he said he was a supporter of the proposal, and as the meeting was called for those opposed to it, he would have to get the consent of the meeting before he could speak. This was given, and as some of those present intimated that they were not conversant with what had taken place in Wellington, Mr. Connett read a report which he had prepared for his directors. They would remember that at a meeting at Palmerston North, the committee which had been set up to report on tne pool scheme had brought forward their report, and it was decided then that the committee should remain in existence and continue their investigations with the object of devising some scheme which would ibe acceptable to the producers. This committee had called the Wellington meeting, where dissatisfaction was at once expressed at the shortness of the notice given. There were 250 delegates present, representing 150 factories, and these delegates, who had no instructions as to how to vote, owing to the fact that their directors had not sufficient information, were allowed to vote on the understanding that their votes would be confirmed or otherwise by their companies within a fortnight. The Hon. W. Nosworthy (Minister of Agriculture) and other members of Parliament were also present. Mr. Nosworthy said it was a good thing for the producers to put their house in order, and if the producers wanted the pool they could rest assured that Parliament would give them every facility to bring it into being. Mr. Connett continued that when he first attended he was in opposition to the scheme, but after hearing the position explained, he recorded his vote in favor of it. His position was that he reported to his directors that day, and if they turned it down then they had to advise headquarters in Wellington. The resolution was carried by 137 votes to 7, those in favor representing 63,000 tons and those against 7000 tons. Voices: “No, no!” and “Rubbish!”

Mr. Connett said they could only take the figures' as stated by the persons themselves. Some of the delegates were personally in favor of the proposal, but had attended with definite instructions to vote against it. The fact that this question of a pool had been discussed for some considerable time showed that there was a feeling amongst the majority that there was need of improvement. A Voice: “No!” Representatives had been elected representing the whole industry to deal with this matter and bring forward a scheme likely to be successful. The committee was continued in force after the meeting at Palmerston North. Mr. Maxwell: “That was apt a repre-

sentative meeting; only a few were at it.” Mr. Connett: “It was a full meeting cf the National Dairy Association. As I said, the feeling at the beginning of the Wellington meeting was that it had been called hastily, and that we did not have full information. During the meeting those present took part in the. discussion on the pool proposals, the discussion following the lines of the Meat Control, alterations being suggested to make it suit the dairy industry.” It was quite right and proper, he continued, that every aspect of the matter should be looked into, and discussed from every point of view. He thought it would have been better if they had had that day a more representative meeting of the Taranaki province. It must be admitted that that meeting represented only a small proportion of the output. TIME FOR DISCUSSION. Referring to Mr. Maxwell, Mr. Connett said there was time to discuss the Bill before it was through Parliament. Mr. Maxwell had said that the board intended to control all the dairy produce of the Dominion, but that was not. correct. He understood that it was to deal only with matters requiring urgent attention. He submitted that the regulation of shipping and the arrival of steamers in London were very necessary, but it was not their intention to take control of the whole of the dairy produce at the present time. They were not going to interfere with the present channels. The present council was elected only for one year, and if they were not satisfied at the end of twelve months they had the option of putitng in other men. Surely they must have confidence in someone. There was nothing wrong with the proposal, and it was only a matter of having confidence in the men they elected. It was simply carrying the spirit of co-operation further in an endeavor to lessen their weaknsses and bring about better shipping facilities. It was quite right that they should criticise the matter from every point of view, but he appealed to them not to read into the measure things that were not there. Replying to questions, Mr. Connett said that his main object in supporting the Bill was to get better shipping facilities, and compulsion would enable the board to say that they represented the whole of the industry. The board of nine was appointed by the council, and their names were submitted to the Minister. Mr. Maxwell then moved the following motion: That this meeting of co-operative dairy factories requests the Government to set up a special Parliamentary committee to take evidence in connection with the proposed Dairy Produce Control Act, such committee to hear representatives of any company desiring to offer evidence. Speaking to the motion, Mr. Maxwell said that if it were passed he would ask them to take some steps to make their protest heard before Parliament. Mr. G. Gibson (Patea) said he wanted to join issue with Mr. Connett, and say that the opposition at Wellington had not been given a hearing. When he rose to speak against the proposal he was counted out. The council had not been elected by the suppliers, but by the conference in Wellington. He considered it wrong for the Minister of Agriculture to make the statement he had made before the conference, that the Bill would go through. Mr. Rowlands considered it unfair that the opposition side had not been allowed to have a voice in the discussion. Mr. Connett said that those who had counted Mr. Gibson out were only a few of those present and they did not represent the feeling of the meeting. BILL SHOULD BE CIRCULATED. Mr. Willcox spoke against the Bill, pointing out that his company had not received any notice of the meeting in Wellington, They were free-born Britishers, and wanted freedom to trade. What they required was some system of intelligence whereby they could see what the markets were like in London much earlier than was at present the case. Mr. W. J. Freeth then moved a further motion: “That the Bill as drafted be submitted to all dairy companies in New Zealand before it comes before the House of Parliament.” A discussion followed on the question of calling another meeting of representatives after the Bill had been discussed, and on the question of appointing delegates from that meeting to go to Wellington in case the Bill came before the House before the

text meeting wad called. Eventually, the chairman put the twq motions to the meeting, and they were carried unanimously. Messrs. E. Maxwell, G. Gibson, and W. G. Green were appointed delegates from the tneeting, Mr. Maxwell pointing out that it was quite open for companies to appoint further delegates or to give those appointed power to speak on their behalf. After a further lengthy discussion, it was decided that the Taranaki members of the council should call a further meeting at New Plymouth of representatives of the companies for Friday, October 6, by which date it was hoped that all companies would have had an opportunity of discussing the proposals. Votes of thanks to the chair and to Mr. Maxwell for calling the meeting closed the proceedings.