member of the NFU, as official investigator into the egg-
marketing scheme appear to me to be legitimate; for obviously and this is no reflection on the Commissioner—his verdict, if favourable to the scheme, will carry no public weight. But there is.another aspect of the inquiry which has not, I believe, provoked comment. Nine years ago the whole subject of agricultural marketing was investigated by the Lucas Com- Mittee, which came to the.conclusion that producer marketing boards like the proposed new egg scheme are undesirable ;---for two reasons. First, 'marketing is a continuous process which not only the producer but the consumer and the distributive trades are interested'; and second, 'it would be utterly wrong to allow a single sectional interest, or combina- • sn of sectional interests, to exercise monopoly rights in the disposal of public property'—public, because in effect the ta• xpayer underwrites such schemes. These arguments appear 10 me to be as cogent now as they were in 1947; and I can see no Point in having a fresh investigation—at the cost, I under- stand, of over £50,000—on the same subject.
Previous page
