Abstract:
Debate about the politico-economic utility of the statutory powers of New Zealand's producer boards to its producers and to the national economy has been on-going since the inception of the New Zealand Meat Producers' Board in 1921-22. At the heart of the debate is the argument that the pastoral, dairy and horticultural industries would be more efficient at generating a profit if the boards were deregulated.
This thesis seeks to ascertain the extent to which the empirical arguments used to advocate the boards' deregulation have been characterised by neo-classical liberal thought. It seeks to do this by pitting the arguments for deregulation against those which support the boards retaining their statutory powers. What emerges in this process is a clear awareness of the way in which the arguments used to support deregulation are rooted in neo-classical liberal ideology rather than in empirical observation.
