WELLINGTON NEW

Hokitika Guardian, 11 June 1929, Page 2

WELLINGTON NEW

OUR INDUSTRIES. . ft (Special Correspondent.) WEI.I I.VUTOX. June «. It is n»pnvt"fl t’>:> t tlio New Zen land 'lamilactarcrs’ Ass >ciation, after a ‘ligtliy disc iis.sinn, has decided to s :g----vest to the Prime Minister and the ..Minister e.-if Industry and Commerce the creation of an Advisory Hoard to study the tariff question. This Hoard is to commence functioning on the Australian lines, which is rather a p : ty. for the Commonwealth with all its high protection has not been able to keep out imports of manufactured and ot’ie* goods, except where there is pract’cal nrohibition, as in the case of butler. Hut it. is a question whether sue!: a body as an Advisory Hoard is needed. A committee of experts has been in vestigating New Zealand indust sun' conditions and is to report to the Government 'shortly. The investigations point to the fact 'hat very marked improvements are needed in the best of the older estab,;shments. in New Zealand before «thev an he claimed to be efficient. An industry is not entitled to protection of •my kind unless the units are efficient and it would be no exaggeration to say that not 5 per cent of the units of any industry can claim efficiency; they may ' e more efficient than the others but that does not mean that they are efficient and as well organised as they •should be.

'The experience of the committee of experts proves this. In one boot factory chosen for its efficiency it was found that by reorganisation the cost of manufacture of a single pair of shoes could be reduced bv 12 per cent. Operations were plotted on a specially prepared chart, and a record made of was to time. In consequence of this investigation the whole operations of the factory are being remodelled. This was claimed to have been an efficient boot factory, and yet costs df production were too high by 12 per cent. If this industry received the protection demanded without this investigation into the cost 12 per cent waste would have been continued, perhaps indefinitely. Investigations of this nature should be extended and inquiries made as to the efficiency of the machinery employed. If this were done it would be found that a good deal of the machinery needs to be scrapped. Then there is the question of rationalisation which is being found a necessity by even the most efficient industries in Europe. If such matters were thoroughly investigated production costs would be greatly reduced, and beifore the State extends protection it should be certain that tlm industry is thoroughly efficient, that costs of production are at the irreducable minimum and that the .organisation and marketing methods are scientific.

To grant protection merely at the request of manufacturers would be unwise. for the industries would rest behind the shelter and instead of ing their organisation and taking those other and necessni’y steps to meet competition they will in due course, when harassed, plead for further shelter. It ha* keen truly said that protection is a disease like tuberculosis. Once von have got it it is extraordinarily difficult to get rid of it. The whole history of Customs barriers goes to show that it is far easier to erect a tariff than to demolish it when built. 'The Commonwealth has discovered the truth of this. The policy of the Baldwin Government in Britain was to grant safeguarding only after a thor-

ough investigation, and the investigation is made in public. We do not want an Advisory Committee on the tariff, hut we do need an Investigation Committee of Experts to closely examine all the methods, operations and organisation of every industry appealing for protection whether by subsidies or by Customs duties. And it should he a point of the investigation to asceitain the economic efleet on the country should it be thought necessary to provide shelter for an industry.

The legislature failed to .insist upon this in connection with the Arbitration Act and we are now suffering from the effects of this neglect. Our industries do not really need more protection hut are in urgent need of re-organisation and of rationalisation. When it is shown that one shoe fatcory that pi ided itself on its efficiency was operating at 12 per cent higher than was warranted what must he the position of those factories that are saddled with obsolete machinery, inefficient organisation and management. There are many 12 per cents to he saved in all our local industries, and they should ho compelled to make those savings, that is to say they must help themselves before they are helped by tlio State and the community.