The Grey River Argus SATURDAY, MARCH 27, 1948. WORKERS NOT TO BE IGNORED

Grey River Argus, 27 March 1948, Page 4

The Grey River Argus SATURDAY, MARCH 27, 1948. WORKERS NOT TO BE IGNORED

MANY complaints against the ambition of workers to exercise a greater voice collectively in industry are equally-aimed'' at the principle of planning in industry. Yet there is reasonable scope for both in a new country just as there is being now found to exist in! older countries. Tf there is question of defending the public interest, the Stale is naturally expected to plan for all. and so long’ as there be no inhibition on the reasonable initiative of the individual, the State is able to plan at least for general stabilisation. Just now there are advocates of some large public works, who quote the regional plan, but the right time tor an extensive public outlay in this direction has not arrived. If and when there should be some setback in the demand for labour in other directions, the surplus then could be economically and constructively absorbed in the making of new roads, the planting of trees, and reclamation of lands. Those countries now opening their doors for immigrants must reasonably look to a day when existing demands tor labour will be about equated, and if there is in view a plan to meet that situation, there need be little or no stagnation nor dislocation. Industrialists naturally say they ought t'o have freedom, and question planning as totalitarian, whereas history this century has demonstrated that the preoccupation of industrialists and other capitalists primarily with profits leaves out of account problems of the sort which give an impetus to the idea of planning. Especially is planning conceived as a means of averting unemployment; con gestion of population; misplacement of industries, and nnecono mie ventures. In Xew Zealand price control has been questioned as an instance of obstructive planning, but it has, on the whole, meant greater security for producers than they might have had with unregulated competition, not to mention consumers who might have gone entirely short many a time. For instance, nationalisation has had in view eliminatio . of cyclical unemployment due varying public investment. There are certainly utilities the transfer of which to public operation, especially if they involve large quantities of capital, makes for a balancing of fluctuations. In some countries to-day even national finance is subject to direction so as to avert the ill effects of trade cycles. New Zealand’s present freedom from unemployment, while it may partly be due 1) post-war demand for our exports, is in itself an advantage. Consumption is quickened, with prices generally very payable, and producers in such a position that their chief anxiety is to find

more labour to employ. There, is room for a re-location of some industries, and if the Government is to assist, it must exercise a measure of control over public credit, < and must induce private capital to enter the field in this connection, even if th>e means are only indirect. An inducement foi expansion should be better machinery for industrial selfgovernment. Some unions may have' faults in other respects, but they are warranted where they expect that the same degree of responsibility which they were in war time expected to shoulder should be extended to them also in peace time. It is undeniable, indeed, that in addition to encouraging a sense of vocation, a more direct degree of control foi the workers may lead in some cases to perpetuating or oven extending monopolies. These must be judged on the basis .of efficiency. Hence the nationalisation of. coal mining, in the long run, should improve industrial relations, although it creates a monopoly. It stands to reason that a man will find it relatively easy to feel he is working z for the right ends and by the right methods if he and his elected representatives have a voice in forming the policy of their industry, and have satisfied themselves that it is correct. Our coal industry might to-day be quoted as an example. It is obvious that private capitalists are mostly very slow to promote good housing and amenities, vocational education, and a minimum income. This Government has illustrated the fact that there is a class of people whose needs cannot be adequately met. merely by setting up a satisfactory wages standard, b'ccause accidents or extra family needs must be met. It is properly from industry itself that such provision ought to come. In time it may do so. The result would be a marked modification of the demands on the fund for social security Yet if the critics of social security are asked to recognise the obligations of industries to their respective operatives, the reply is that this cannot be done, as it would interfere with the blessings of all out competition, and all the rest of it. Those at a loss to explain the military and political uncertainty now sc widely prevalent have closed their eyes to the fundamental fact that the future lies with the workers. So it should.