WELLINGTON TOPICS

Hokitika Guardian, 24 June 1933, Page 6

WELLINGTON TOPICS

ODDS AND ENDS BOARD OF TRADE ACT (Special Correspondent.) WELLINGTON, June 21. Mr A. S. Burgess, president ot the Associated Chambers of Commerce, has Very properly renewed attention to the fact that the Board ol Trade Act of 1916 is still "on the Statute Book, to the continued menace of trade and commerce throughout the Dominion. This peril to legitimate business was assailed by the Taxpayers’ Federation five or six years ago, ancl the Hon. A. J. McLeod, wh (> then, among other responsibilities, was Minister of Industries and Commerce, framed an amending Bill which would have removed the clauses in the measure to which the Taxpayers federation objected. As it happened, however, the general election of 1928 removed Air McLeod and his colleagues from office, and the United Party, supported by the Labour Party and led by Sir Joseph Ward, took possession of the Treasury Benches, where a review 7 of the Board of Trade Act appears to have met with little, favour.

Under the '-offending Act, ns it still stands in the Statute Book, the Minister in charge, with the authority of “The Governor General in Council,” make such provision as he may berm necessary for the following purposes. “For the prevention and suppression of methods of 'competition, trading, or business which are considered to be unfair or prejjudical to the industries of New Zealand, or to the public welfare; j for the prevention of inonpolies and combinations in or in relation to any industry which is considered to be prejudicial to that or to any other industry in New Zealand, and for the establishment of fixed maximum or minimum prices, or rates for any classes of goods or services or otherwise for the regulation or control of such prices or rates.” It is further provided that when any of these regulations is gnzetter it immediately comes into force whether Parliament is sitting or not. Nor is this by any means the end of the authority bestowed upon the Ministed, fortified by the compelling powcr of “The Governor General in Council.’,’ The. public at large is told that “for the prohibition, regulation or control of different prices or rates for goods or services, or the differential treatment of different persons or classes of persons in respect of goods'or services in eases where the existance of such differential prices, rates or treatment is considered prejudicial to any industry in New Zealand or to the public welfare,”.. the authority of the Minister, endorsed by ITis Excellency, completes the matter. Further than this, “for the regulation and control .0f... industries in any other matter whatever which is deemed necessary for the maintenance and prosperity of these industries and the economic welfare of New 7 Zealand” may rest safely in the hands of an inexperienced authority. Surely the Government is not going to allow this state of affairs to remain indefinitely unattended. The Government has held these emergency powers for nearly sixteen years since the conclusion of the Great War and for fully twelve years after any plausible excuse could be found for their retention. It still may arbitarily fix wages and prices; may suppress any industry that it considers prejudicial to any other industry; may assume any control of any private enterprise that -caffehes its fancy and ' may ruin any individual who may obstruct the patli 0 f its ambition. But it is the politicians, particularly the j members of Parliament, who should be moving in this matter. While they remain silent in the presence of such a. glaring travesty of British fair play they must share with the Government the blame for the continuance of this outrage upon the Dominion’s progress and its good name. Air Burgess has done good service to the communjity in this matter, and it is to be hopled, that his effort will meet with genloral: approval and effective assistance.