POWER BOARD TRADING

Hokitika Guardian, 31 August 1929, Page 3

POWER BOARD TRADING

ASTOUNDING ALLEGATIONS

A REFUTATION

(Nineteen Twenty-Eight Committee.)

“It is well known,” runs a paragraph in a statement issued by the Electric Power Boards and Supply Authorities, “that, a /very definite effort is being made bj* the Nineteen TwentyEight Committee through the Press to discredit the trading operations of power boards and to foster the idea with the public that the boards are trading unfairly. The obvious intention is to create a public opinion that will influence the politicians with the idea of getting regulatory legislation passed which’ will enable electrical traders to-obtain direct control of that section of the trade which they now supply indirectly through, the power boards. Certain definite charges were made against the-power boards and the fiist inclination of those connected with the boards was to immediately refute the statements made.”

The Nineteen Twenty-Eight Committee wishes' again to emphatically deny these assertions of the “Electric Power Boards and Supply Authorities’ Secretary’s Branch.” The Committee is not endeavouring to discredit the operation of the power boards and it is not seeking to assist electrical traders in securing direct control of the section of their trade which now passes through the lyirids of the power boards. It merely asks that power boards shall be compelled to trade under the same terms and conditions as do private concerns. It .agks, for instance, that the boards shall pay the same rates off land and income tax; the same local rates and taxes; shall be subject to the seme laws and penalties as are private traders, and to the same .arbitration and labour restrictions. It is asking for nothing that should not be conceded in equity and justice. For the purpose of illustrating this point, for the hundredth time, it may be pointed out that there are boards which confine themselves strictly to their intended functions of supplying power; then there are those which, in addition to supplying power sell, a limited variety of electrical apparatus and fittings, and, finally, there are those which enter aggressively into com petition in all branches of electrical trading. No -exception can be taken by the private trader to the operations of the boards included in the first of these classes. Their trading is perfectly legitimate. The boards comprising the second class have persuaded themselves that they wi“ increase thp consumption of power by selling certain classes off apparatus. The third class usurps all the functions of the private trader accepting sole agencies, refusing all recognition to competing lines, main tabling show rooms for all classes of electrical goods, and supplying their own wiring installations and every other requisite of the trade. This is the policy which the Right Hon. J. G. Coat es described as “intolerable.” The three classes cannot, of course, be placed in the same category. The first, as already stated, is without reproach ; the second is not a very grave offender, and probably would be ready enough to have its trading Operations placed on a legitmate business footing and itself freed from reproach. It is the third class, as already mentioned which needs attention in the interests of the public and the legitimate traders. So far boards of this class have been content to escape what criticism thov may by hiding behind the better records of ciasses l and 2. They know perfectly well that tlieir case and the cases of the other boards are entirely different. They are the boards which drew from Mr* Coates the fervent ejaculation “intolerable,” and no doubt Mr Coates’s successor in the administration of the affairs of the countiy having made himself acquainted with the facts, will take care tlifjt legitimate privatee enterprise is not throttled by unfair State trading. Other aspects of this subject will be dealt with later on, the indulgence of the Editor permitting.