REGIMENTATION!

Evening Star, Issue 22463, 7 October 1936, Page 2

REGIMENTATION!

ALL OPPOSITION GUNS TRAINED STRONG ATTACK ON INDUSTRIAL EFFICIENCY BILL MIXED SOVIETISM AND SOCIALISM [Per United Press Association.] WELLINGTON, October G. The second reading of the Industrial Efficiency Bill was resumed in the House. Mr Hargest said he did not think the Government had any right to come along at this stage and coerce all the business people in the Dominion to submit the whole of their plans and business undertakings to the jurisdiction of a Bureau which might or might not be competent, and most likely would not be competent. Had the Bill been promoted by a Government with other ideals he might have been prepared to support it. The Minister and his party had been interested in industry for many years, but only from one side—that of the man earning wages from industry. That made people somewhat perturbed as to what the result of legislation such as that before the House would be. Was it, he asked, the intention of the Government not only to socialise industry, but to take control of it and hand that control to the workers in industry? PRESENT WASTE AND CONFUSION. Mr' Mason congratulated the Minister of Industries and Commerce on having attempted to solve the problem of the commercialisation of industry. He believed a Bill of that sort in New Zealand would meet with more success than in other older countries where conditions were more firmly established. Industry had had a severe time during the depression, and unrestricted competition had not proved its The results of unrestricted competition were not so glorious as some people might think. He likened the position of industry to the difference between an army and an inglorious mob. There must be some organisation and some aim, and the need for the Bill was long overdue. He hoped the members of the Opposition would help to improve the Bill rather than raise the irrational objections to which the House was used. The purpose of the Bill was to enable industry to do what it really wished to do. The Bill would be favourable where there was an opening for a new industry, but it would be unfavourable where there was already a surplus of units in the industry. He thought the Bill contemplated compensation where an industry was adversely affected, and thought that any benefit received by one section of industry should be used to indemnify those who ■ suffered. No longer could there be any waste and confusion in industry, and the job must be tackled. He was glad to see that the Minister was tackling the work, which'was a work ol true patriotism, because it was a work to increase the efficiency and therefore the self-respect of the Dominion. “ MAY” AND " IF ” BILL. Mr Hamilton said the Bill did not face up to any problem. It faced thin air. It did not deal with any problem. It was the most indefinite Bill he had ever seen introduced into the House. It set up a board of about 16 members, and gave power to levy on industry to pay their expenses. Everythin' after that was “ may ” and “ if.” Ho said the trouble with the present Government was that it could see nothing right in anything that had been done in the past. The Bill did not take control or deal with one industry. He thought the Bill should be scrapped and substituted by one that had a definite purpose. It was wrong, he contended, to pass legislation that hung over the heads of everybody, and they did not know when it was going to operate. He did not believe the Minister intended to use the powers given in the Bill, and said it was a Bill that did not do credit to the Minister. There was danger in licensing industries. It tended to create monopolies. DUE FORTY YEARS AGO. Mr C. H. Burnett said it was a great pity they did not have tlje Bill 30 or 40 years ago. If they had had it millions of pounds would have been saved to people who put their money into all sorts of wild cat schemes. Mr Coates said nobody knew how far the Bill might go, or how it was going to work. It provided for the regimentation of industry, and would not work. It would mean increased costs and inefficiency, and the public would not be served as well as they were being served at present. As the direct result of the Minister’s administration of the wheat and flour situation, the price of bread had gone up from a penny to twopence a loaf. Manufacturers were entitled to ask for what they wanted, but were they satisfied with the Bill?

Mr Sullivan; Licensing had their countenance; co-ordination had their concurrence. The Bureau had their concurrence, hut they wanted to be consulted about the expansion of the scheme. Mr Contes said he had been told the Minister told the manufacturers that if they did not agree to the proposals iu the Bill he would socialise every industry in the country.

Mr Sullivan: I hope the hon. gentleman _ will accept my word that I said nothing of the kind. What I did say was that if they did not want the Bill that was all right.

UNDREAMED OF BUREAUCRACY. Mr Coates said tho Bill meant a bureaucracy that tho country never dreamed of before. It was carrying legislation far beyond any conception that had been thought of previously. The Bill seemed to bo the outcome of requests of which the Government itself had no very clear idea. Tho progress that had been made bv New Zealand had never been made by Government leader ship, hut by private enterprise." The Bill, he said, was absolutely wrong. The course that should have been followed was that if a particular set of circumstances arose a Rill should be passed to deal with those circumstances Mr Roberts thought the Bill must be on right lines because the leading members of the Opposition had opposed it. The Bill was a step towards rationalisation, and tho aim of the Government had in view was service to the nation by co-ordination. It was the Government’s aim to plan in an intelligent way all industrial organisation, so that the best results could be achieved, and it would bo a groat help to the Minister of Finance in negotiating a trade agreement with Britain. FIRST STEP TO SOVIET. Mr Cobbo said the Bill seemed to bo an attempt to give the Minister of Industries and Commerce control of practically all the business of the Dominion. The Bill was tho first step to bring the Soviet system into operation in New Zealand. The measure was designed to include the farming industry, which had already been hit by the Government’s legislation. The intention of tho measure might be good, but it was a hasty, ill-conceived, and rash experiment. The measure was too far-reaching to be rushed through, and he suggested that the Government should hold it over till it was further examined. Mr Christie said the Minister had no intention of interfering in business where he could avoid it. His hands were already full and ho was not looking for unnecessary work. He showed how regulation had brought order into the transport service, and said the same could be achieved in industry. New Zealand’s produce was increasing in value because of war preparations. It was becoming increasingly difficult for any business to stand alone, and in Britain, where conditions were also very difficult, there was demand for control and regulation of business. The Bill would protect not only those who were likely to put their money into unsound businesses, but would protect the people of New Zealand as a whole, because uneconomic businesses must react on the people of New Zealand generally. CREATING COMBINES. Mr Wright said the object of the Bill was to regulate prices and to prevent cut-throat competition, which the people generally regarded as a very freed thing. However, he did not beleve it was worth tho paper it was printed on. When the Bureau attempted to put it into operation it woud break down under its own weight. The Bill would create rings and combines which would keep prices up. It really put industry into a combine against the geueral public. If tho Bill went into operation the day of the small man would be gone. The small man would bo down and out. It would prevent the small man getting a start, and after all, most of the big businesses of to-day made a very small beginning. The whole thing was impracticable. It was incorrect to say that the secondary industries were in a state of chaos. After the first blow, due to tho depression, the value of tho production of the secondary industries was rapidly returning to the level of 1928-29. He claimed that the secondary industries were in a strong and healthy condition. AMENABLE TO OPINION. Mr Thorn said a Bureau in a democratic country like New Zealand could not afford to be dictatorial when applications for licenses were being considered. He said the Bureau would be amenable to public opinion. Ho supported tho Bill because unregulated systems made it extremely difficult for industry to bear the strain of modern conditions Blind and haphazard methods not only hindered the development of a coun try’s resources, but involved many investors in considerable losses, and were therefore cruel and wasteful. Hi« second ground for support was that individual unrestricted competition was hard to direct towards aims likely to servo the common good, and it might easily conflict with public policy and national interests. His third ground was the political reaction from a condition of industry bordering on instability and chaos that might very well produce prejudice to the well-being of many people. A fourth ground was the modern economic situation which was compelling nearly every civilised nation to adopt more or less the principles embodied in the Bill. COMPLETE SOMERSAULT. Mr Smith agreed that tho Bill would mean tho elimination of small business men. He said the Government had turned a complete somersault. The principles expressed in the Bill were absolutely opposed to those expounded by the Labour Party from its seats iu the House and during the election campaign. The Government was setting up a Bureau of Industry which was only a board. He claimed the scheme tho Government was supporting was destroying co-operation in industry. If the Bill went through, New Zealand would have a mixture of Russian philosophy and half-baked Socialism. No one could predict what would happen if tho Government remained in power after next election. First of all, there was elimination of the small man in that Bill. The Government would then concentrate on the big man, and the time would then be ripe for a Socialistic Government to walk in and take control of industry. That was tlie very danger in that Bill. Ho . urged tho Prime Minister to visit Australia to see what failures the State enterprises had been there before tho present Bill was put through. He had little objection to licensing, and thought that under certain circumstances it might be beneficial to industry, but his objection was that tho licenses were to be granted by the Bureau, not tho Minister. The debate was adjourned, and the House rose at 10.30 p.m.