MR. LANGSTONE SURPRISES

Chronicle (Levin), 22 October 1947, Page 5

MR. LANGSTONE SURPRISES

Press Association)

THINKS ONE WAY, VOTES THE OTHER

(Per

WELLINGTON, Oct. 21. A surprise tuni was given by Mr. F. Langstone (Roskill) in the debate in the House of liepresentatives tonight, wlio protested in his usual vigorous tenns against certain decisions of the Pharmaey Industrv Committee operating the pharmaey industrial plan. He said it was surely never intended tha$ members of anv calling should have the right to determine whetlier an individual in that calling should be perinitted to continue in it. He referred to the case of an Auckland chemist who, after being in business for some years, was obliged to leave his premises and after moving to another shop, Avas refused a licence under the pharmaey industrial plan. Alr. Langstone declared tliat the pharmaey industry was fat and ricli and it appeared that the peoi»le were being taxed merelv to pay shekels into the coffers of the industry. Bureaucracy might be very necessary but it must be judged ou results and if results were unsatisfactory, eriticism was in order. "I don't tliink the Minister or anv other person can justify the action in this particular case," said Mr. Langstone. ' ' Too feAv new chemists' sliops are being opened and the jieople have difiiculty in obtaining medicines. 1 will use my inlluenee against bureaucratic stupidities of this nature. " Opposition voices: Hear! Hear! Mr. M. H. Oram said he was amazed at M r. Langstone 's statement and asked if he would vote with the Opposition if an amendment were moved to reduce the vote in protest against such bureaucratic actions. Wheu the Leader of the Opposition, Mr. Holland, rose Jie said lie Avas glad to be associated with Mr. Langstone who had cited an instan.ee of what was happening frequently in New Zealand — qualified persons were being denied an opportunitv under the Industrial efiiciency Act, to sta-i't their own businesses. There would be mucli support for Alr. Langstone and to give hini the opportunitv of supporting his convictions, Mr. Holland moved that the vote be reduced by £1 as a protest against the Government 's refusal to enable qualilied persons to open up in business. Mr. A. H. Nordmeyer said the plan for the pharmaey industry was evolved at a time when a large overseas finii was opening branclies in New Zealand and local pliarmacy was in a perilous position. Had the trend evident at that time continued, many chemists would have*been forced out of business. To protoct them from uueeonomic"competition, the Government decided to rationali.se the industry. It did not sav no person not tlien in business would be allowed to start but it did sayapplication must be made to the "committee to justify the opening of a pharmaey in anv particular area. Many new businesses had in fact started since the plan was put into operation. Mr. Nordmeyer said that wliile some applications for licences had been refused, it ws[s also true that a considerable number

had been granted. The House must determine whether the poliey of rationalisation would continue or whether external competitiou might put out of business many men ivho were doing a good job today. Witliout creating monopoly conditions, it was to avoid throwing those now in business to the wolves. The particular case cited by Alr. Langstone might excite sympathv and possibly the decision of tlie Bureau of Industry might have been wrong liut the person concerned had not exercised liis right of appeal. Had he appealed suecessfully the House might not have lieard of him and the Act of which complaint had been made might have been operating for his protection. Mr. L. W. Doidge (Tauranga) said the case raised by Mr. Langstone was not an isolated oue. The Bureau of Industry had, by its decisions, created many such injustices. It was pleasing to lind Mr. Langstone taking such an attitude and inspiring the Leader of the Opposition 's amendment. Arr. Langstone said the nioving of an aniendnient as was done by Mr. Holland, was an old game. He aeknowledged that the plan for the pharmaey industry was in^rodueed under the circumstances as related by Air. Nordmeyer but said it was pot intended to enable Neiv Zealand chemists to obstruct a fellow chemist from conducting business. The individual in Auckland Avlioin he had cited, was actually forced out of his shop and moved to the onlv other premises he could ob-I tain. It Avas after that he was refused a reneAval of his licence and then, unfortunately, he allowed the three months' period to elapse Avithout lodging an appeal. Zoning should be dealt with bv commonsense and logic. "I Avould like to see the Pharmaey Planning t'ommittee and Bureau of Industry called to the bar of the House to justify their judgment in this particular case. It isn't a question of iiioa--ing an amendnieut. I could ha\re moved oue niyself. I can look after myself. I don't Avant the Leader of the Opposition to move amendment s on my behalf

but the argument used by the Minister just doesn't fit this particular case. I biame tlie committee and Bureau of Industry for not using wisdom and judgment," said Mr. Langstone. A diA'ision Avas called for and Mr. Holland 's amendment was defeated by 39 to 35, Mr. Langstone voting with the Government despite much good natured chafifing by Opposition members as they moved to the lobby.