COST OF LIVING

Hokitika Guardian, 11 March 1920, Page 3

COST OF LIVING

SERIOUS POSITION IN BRITAIN. LONDON, Feb. 19. * The publication of the official wool, i

. cotton, and tobacco reports, concurj rently with the admitted failure of the k Profiteering .Act, luis given an irresistible impetus to the discussions on the oppressive cost of living, which in--1 eludes a. 135 per cent increase in staple foods. i i It the dominant popular topic of ; the hour, in conjunction with immediate demands for higher wages in numerous' 1 trades, which if conceded are estimated to cost £4,000,000 weekly. i The enquiries regarding tobacco and sewing cotton do not convict the manufacturers of taking the fullest advantage of the world scarcity of raw materials, or their opportunities of fleecing consumers, but the progressive increases and the enormous net trading profits remain, as “The Times” points out, a source of popular provocation. This gives the social revolutionaries an unexampled chance to promote unrest,

and is injurious to the whole structure of private enterprise. Messrs J. and P. Coats, Ltd., decline to comment upon the Profiteering Committee’s report. “The Times” regards the dislosures as a test case, and states that the effects of monopoly must he probed to the bottom. The point arises whether it is permissible for any private concern to leave the public dependent upon its goodwill. There is also the question of the effects of Messrs Coats’ dealings upon our friends and Allies overseas.

The Labour Party is concentrating on the wool and cotton reports as examples of the attitude of traders throughout the country, which they contend is' responsible for the interminable rise in prices- and wages. They demand that the Government shall immediately strengthen the Profiteering Act. Mr Adamson, leader of the Labour Party, in an interview, points out that ever since the reports have been published Messrs Coates and the tobacco combine have further increased their prices. He suggests that the Government ought to be forced to make profit, eering a criminal offence.

Many newspapers support the To-bacc-o Committee’s suggestion that the j Government should compel all big businesses to publish exact details of costs and profits. I The ‘‘Westminster Gazette,” however suggests that the Laboun'es will be better qualified for the criticism of i monopolists when they .- void nionopo- j lism themselves, especially by the exchi- j sion of ex-soldiers from membership ( of the unons.

The Labour Party has decided to start a whirlwind campaign throughout the country to compel the Government to legislate to stop manufacturers and wholesale merchants from profiteering.

Mr Clynes says that it is futile to penalise small grabbers. Hie big fish must be caught and their profits sharply cut down, otherwise millions of workers will demand more wages. The position lias become exceedingly serious. Mr Appleton and other moderate Labourites declare that strikes and further wage increases are useless. They claim that drastc. anti-profiteering legislation is the only remedy. The “Evening News” understands that the position is alarming the Government, which has decided to continue the Food Ministry indefinitely.