PRODUCTION OF WEALTH

New Zealand Times, Volume XLIV, Issue 10280, 15 May 1919, Page 6

PRODUCTION OF WEALTH

INDUSTRIAL EFFICIENCY HOW BEST TO INCREASE IT. “How Best to Increase the Industrial Production” was tho subject of an address delivered last night by Air B. E Alurphy, lecturer on economics av Victoria. College, under the auspices ot the Central Chamber of Commerce. Air Leigh Hunt, in the absence through illness of the president,, Air C. Ai. Luke, presided over a large attenaaUAJr Alurphy said that he did not propose to criticise the present industrial system. He did not propose to go down to bedrock aud ought to be. Ho thought that that was not what the Cuamher of Com merce wanted him to do. He proposed to take the present system for granted, to assume that it would last our time, aud to consider how best under tha,. system they could increase industrial production. In tho last analysis, tho only method by which man could produce wealth was by the application ot labour to land—in other words, hy man operating on his material environment. Labour and capital united, under the modern system, to produce wealth. Therefore, there were three directions fo which they must look for increased production. .They must look (1) to whatever would increase the efficiency of the employing function; (2) to whatever would increase the etficiency ot labour; and (3) to whatever "omii tend to increase the harmonious cooperation of employer and employee. For increased production there must, in. the first place, bo efficient plants and up-to-date machinery. In tho second place, waste must be eliminated; and in the past the most effective way to do tnis had been found to be to look for uses for by-products qr so-called refuse. Then, there should bo properly co-ordinated subsidiary industries, to fully develop all the resources and opportunities of a district, as a few big businesses only could not effectively do. Again, industrial plants must not, on tho one hand, be on too small a scale lot economic working; and, on tho othei hand, they must not bo on too large a scale, as they thereby became uuwieldly. SCIENCE AND INDUSTRY. ‘

To increase productivity to the fuil there must also bo a proper co-ordina-tion between science—technical science, natural science, and economic science—and industry. Unless industrial concerns were on a fairly large scale, it was not possible to apply science successfully to industry. A comparative ly small scale English industrial concern could not afford to’ employ a largo number of chemists in research work; but the great German Kartels, or trusts, often employed as many «s 200 trained chemists on such work. Many of the chemists might produce little or no results; but if from time to time only one be-spectacled scientist evolved a new method or produced « by-product that was worth while, bo far- more than made up for many failures. (Applause.) There must be a constant fertilising stream of such new discoveries all the time; and this could bo scoured only by business on a large scale, or by co-operation. In Britain, at the present time, many businesses organised on the Whitley system were co-operating for this purpose, and the State was also undertaking research work to aid-Indus-try. It was for these, among other reasons, that the Balfour of Burleigh Commission had not only whitewashed the big trusts, but actually suggested that, if business undertakings would not voluntarily amalgamate for bigscalo production, the Government should syndicate them by compulsion. The advantages of production on a large scale were so great that any country that threw them away was bound to fall behind in the race. A country could not succeed if it produced an immense variety of nonstandardised articles. Chaotic and wasteful production by means of many small plants must be got rid of d production was to be increased to the fullest. They must at least unite in research and selling syndicates. LABOUR EFFICIENCY.

Dealing with the question of how to Increase the efficiency of labour, Mr Murphy said that a great deal of labour unrest was duo to the spectacularly large profits made in somo industries ; but if proper statistical records were kept, the workers would see that on the whole profits were not unfairly large, and they would also see what, they could fairly expect to get in the way of better hours, wages, etc. If , they wanted to get more efficient labour, the first thing was to see that the workers got enough food. Th<# might be inclined to laugh at such/a suggestion here; but Professor Bdlvley had found at Homo that 40 per cent, of the British working-classes coujd/not by honest work get enough food to keep themselves and their families thoroughly physically fit and efficient. Then the workers' must haws decent clothing and decent houses. The slum problem was not merely a matter . of humanitarian sentiment, it was a thing that reacted, and reacted at once upon the efficiency of labour. (Applause.) Other things boipg equal, if the labourer was to produce efficiently, he must bo decently fed. Hence they wanted pure food laws'. f He must bo decently clothed, and h/> must ho* decently housed. He mufet also bo well educated. There was Only one way in which in the long run we could beat Germany and that Was not by the, artificial protection of tariffs but by a higher level of education and by the adoption of the hotter methods of production which tint education would 1 render possible. (Applause.) Go.sr-.mv FOLLY. Referring to , the go-slow policy the lecturer said that ho believed that the workers were, going slow; and under presept conditions if his hearers put themselves ill tho workers’ place, they could, not ivondor at it. He regarded the go-slow policy, however, as economic folly, because it meant less production. n/id therefore higher prices—that wan to say, increased cost of living. The higher prices meant that the people oould buy less, and that meant a smallf/r demand for labour and tended to lowvr wages. To get rid of the goslow system, they must got rid of tho present scramble between capital and labmvr for their respective shares of theft* joint product; and, in tho absence of /my national principle of distribution, wo must regulate distribution by SI •/■to action. In this country we were t ying to do that by moans of the Arbitration Court. In T-ngiand they were endeavouring to effect tho same end

by the “revaluation of industry” under what was known as “the Whitley system,” which Was spreading in the Old Country, and had passed the initial stage. ' (Applause.) There was a National Standing Industrial Council, consisting of delegates from tho District Industrial Councils, which in turn consisted of representatives from tho committees in each business concernrepresentatives both of the management and of the workers. Each of these committees was endowed with tho function of shop discipline. Alen were sick of being irrationally bossed. (Applause and laughter.) They had come to see now that all business belonged to the community, and that it should bo run, not the wav the capitalist liked, not the way the workers liked, but as the community liked. (Applause.) Under the Whitley system disputes would be settled before they became acute. Causes of irritation would he removed as they arose; and if the men wanted a rise of wages, the statistical information relating to the business in which they were engaged would be put before them and they, would be able to see what, if anything, could he fairly conceded to them. (Applause.) So long as there was only what Carlyle called “the cash nexus” between capital and labour, they could<aot get rid of the go-slow folly. Under present conditions he would be greatly tempted to go slow himself. (Laughter and applause.) But if ho had an in the industry and a share in its control and it's prosperity, he would do his best. (Applause.) To secure such conditions and to introduce a more-hn-man spirit into industry was the object of the Whitley system, which put the man who supplied the labour on the same plane of dignity as the man who supplied the capital. (Applause.) It employer and employe© were to n ork in harmony, they must. come to regard business primarily as service and profit as a secondary consideration. (Applause.) . , A number of questions were asked and answered: and, on the motion of Mr A. Edwards. \a hearty vote of thanks was accorded the lecturer.