Untitled

Hokitika Guardian, 27 March 1924, Page 2

A recent issue of a banking journal published in New York discussed the question of the efficacy of competition in regard to trading, ’lhe writer round lv condemned Government interference. As in New Zealand there are frequent appeals to the Government to interfere with trade with a view to keeping up the price to consumers; the comment. which is as follows, is not without general interest, and is published for general consideration. The writer goes 011 to say that the fundamental objection to all such interference vitli trade is that on the whole the public is served best by a, state of freedom. It is not in tile pubic interest to have business standardised or regulated by governmental authority beyond the suppression of dishonest dealings or practices generally recognised as subversive of the public morals, as the use of tho lottery. Progress is achieved by innovation, and the public can be trusted to determine the methods that give it the best service and to eliminate the others. Every interference in common businss life inis a harmful influence, because it accustoms the public to look to the Government to correct all temporary maladjustments, instead of allowing the natural laws of trade to do it, as they are quite certain to do with no great delay. The Government has not the requisite wsidom for performing such functions, and it.s blundering attempts simply make matters worse.

The Minister of Health in common with other distinguished visitors to the local mental hospital did not take long to condemn tho old buildings in use once he had inspected them. His condemnation came rather late ill tho day however, as reforms were in hand, and it will he only a matter of a comparatively short time before the much condemned structure will be razed to the ground. It should be pointed out, however, that it took the Government, of which the Minister is a member an undue time to come to a decision in regard to wbat should be done in the matter. This though the action was obvious. Really, therefore, flic strictures which the .Minister thought fit to pass was a belated condemnation of the administration of the Government of which lie is a. member. It is satisfactory to filnl that the eyesore is about to ho removed, hut this was rendered possible only by the voice of public opiuoin expressed through various channels more or less influential. It may be said that all’s well that ends well, hut the experience should be a lesson to the Government that where in similar eases complaints are made about public buildings, the representations should not he treated lightly. II the responsible officers press the matter as a necessity it should he sufficient for the Government.that there is a case to he met, and if the Government is not going to lie guided by its responsible officers, who is to step in? It appears it is necessary For the public voice to tie raised, as in this instance to expose the scandal. That is not sound administration.