POWER BOARD TRADING

Hokitika Guardian, 7 September 1929, Page 2

POWER BOARD TRADING

UNFAIR. COMPETITION. DELUSIVE METHODS. (Nineteen Twenty-Eight Committee.) It already has been emphasized that the private trader takes no exception to those electric power boards which confine their activities to the- generation of. power and its distribution. It was for these purposes the power boards were constituted. Further, it has been mentioned that the private trader bears no particular grudge against the power boards which have persuaded themselves that by supplying certain classes of apparatus they will extend the use of electricity and so increase its consumption. These boards probably would offer no objection to the legislation that has been proposed to place the power boards and the private traders upon an equal footing in this respect. If the power boards enter into competition with the private traders it is only fair that they should be subject to the same taxes, the same rates' and the same local and national obligations as are imposed upon the individuals engaged in the same lines of business. BASIC PRINCIPLES.

In the course of a paper read before the Auckland Chamber of Commerce a little while ago, Mr Ralph Ziman, one elf the leading members of the New Zealand Bar, who already has been widely quoted, laid down the three principles which had to he observed to place State trading upon a proper footing. They were, in brief, as follows: — (1) That the State trading activity be carried on under conditions which give it no unfair advantage in law over private traders in the same business. (2) That the State trading activity he so carried on that its results are capable of accurate comparison with those of private enterprise in the same line of business. (3) That the State trading activity be carried on in such form as ■ not-to-work: any hardship on individuals having no associate tion with it.: , , ••• • . • S These conclusions' have been endor- ■ sed by other high legal authorities, and by both the present Prime Minister, Sir Joseph Ward, and his predecessor in office, the Right Hon. J. G. Coates. It. now remains only for Parliament to. give effect to the views of these high authorities and so put a stop to unfair systems of State trading.. .'■ .. . ' A QUESTIONNAIRE. ■ That many of the power boards are anxious to obtain the facts concerning their own. trading operations, was shown recently by the distribution of a by their Secretaries’ Association seeking for information on the subject. Wellington, Christchurch and Dunedin were not included in these inquiries, on account of their being municipalities; but it is well known that while Wellington and Dunedin are mild offenders,, Christchurch pushes ' its trading activities to the very last extreme. The questionnaire sought information in various shapes, but only the most comprehensive need be quoted here. This asked whether or not the board approached enforced compliance with its policy by refusing to.finance or.service any line not approved and sold by itself. To this inquiry twenty-four boards stated they made no difference; four financed only installations carried ,out by themselves; ..one financed all installations and appliances except ranges, which had to be purchased through the board; one had the same policy for motors; one financed any installation, bub only appliances purchased through the board; three had not been asked to finance installations put in by private traders; two did not finance at all, and one sent no reply. To more intimate questions only twenty-seven of the thirty-seven boards replied. Twenty stated , they did not '• differentiate between installations made by themselves and by private traders and seven stated no distinction was made “except that extra service was given in cases of appliances sold by the board Ten remained discreetly silent. A SANE SUGGESTION. Here surely is abundant evidence that a very considerable number of the boards are in' active competition with private enterprise in one direction or another. The . facts are open for everyone to see and their significance is ofivious. Private enterprise does not ask that power boards shall be driven out of business. It merely demands that they shall bear the same burden as are imposed upon itself. In summing up the . information it has gathered the Secretaries Committee observes, “It is clear from the information collected that statements made by the Ninteeen Twenty-Eight Committee are generally wrong and misleading.” And yet not one single statement by the Committee has been refuted! How ever, the Secretaries’ in the concluding paragraph of their report have the grace 'to suggest that misunderstandings might possibly exist and that the present unsatisfactory position could probably be cleared up by arranging a conference between representatives of the Electrical Traders’ Federation and the Power Boards. The Nineteen 'lVenty-Eight Committee heartily supports this suggestion.