As could be expected, Fonterra's decision to supply free milk
to primary school children from next year has been greeted
with nothing but praise. So it should.
Who could argue with the sentiments - New Zealand's largest
company investing some of its billions to give children a
wholesome and nutritional daily glass of milk?
And, to avoid the unappealing, not to say unappetising
spectre of warm, souring milk, Fonterra intends to
investigate supplying schools with refrigerators, too.
The Milk for Kiwis plan announced by Fonterra chief executive
Theo Spierings last week will initially benefit 14,000
children in 110 Northland primary schools.
The trial will be monitored, but Fonterra says the intention
is to provide milk to all schools from 2013. Worthy
intentions aside, it is likely some froth on the top of the
milk has also helped drive Fonterra's decision.
Offering free milk is a public relations coup designed to
counter the ongoing criticism the company has faced about the
high cost of milk.
And, quite possibly, to offset the continuing bad odour of
the damage to New Zealand's waterways by the dairying
industry New Zealanders want to know why milk and other dairy
products such as cheese and butter cost so much in a country
with an abundance of grass and dairy cows.
They do not understand the theory served up by Mr Spierings
and others - that a doubling of the price paid
internationally for dairy products in the past 18 months
pushes up dairy prices in this country, too.
Economists may understand the mechanics of national and
international pricing; it is the same theory used to explain
why South Islanders cannot have cheap electricity when it is
produced in abundance on their doorsteps through hydro
generation; or why fruit and vegetables grown just down the
road cost as much as garlic or grapes imported from halfway
round the world.
To ordinary New Zealanders, it seems logical goods and food
items produced locally should cost less than those grown or
manufactured overseas which incur the inescapable additional
cost of being freighted here. But this is the reality of
being part of a globalised, largely tariff-free international
trade system.
Ironically, insofar as it is criticised for its high prices,
Fonterra is a victim of its own success. The company has
recorded exceptionally strong financial results for its
10,500 farmer shareholders. It has just announced a record
financial result for 2011, including revenue of $19.9
billion.
It will distribute milk payments and dividends totalling
$10.6 billion - $2.4 billion more than in 2010 and $1.5
billion more than its previous best year in 2008.
Rising milk prices have been panned by everyone from social
service agencies to nutritionists.
Sugary soft drinks are now often cheaper in the supermarket
than milk and much less healthy. This has led to declining
milk consumption, a trend not seen in this country before.
In his Milk for Kiwis announcement, Mr Spierings acknowledged
one of the company's goals was to ensure children grew up
drinking milk.
Fonterra will not reveal the cost of the scheme. A rough
calculation puts the cost of the milk for Northland children
at about $700,000 a year, based on each child receiving a
daily 250ml glass over the school year.
The financial commitment could grow to a much more hefty $20
million-plus a year when the scheme is introduced across the
country.
Then there is the cost of the refrigerators. Fonterra has
wisely realised today's strict health and safety regulations
would not allow schools to leave milk sitting around
unchilled as happened in the days of the old school milk
scheme between 1937 and 1967.
For New Zealanders who recall the sometimes stomach-churning
experience of sitting in a classroom cradling a warm bottle
of milk and poking a straw through the gooey layer of cream
congealed on the top, refrigeration will be regarded as a
welcome advance.
Of course, today's school children with a dislike for milk
could always do what previous generations did -
surreptitiously donate their school-issued beverage to a
fellow student.
A name, residential address, and (preferably residential) telephone number is required from readers who comment on ODT Online. These details will not be visible to site visitors.