"Business Acumen in Auckland"

Sun (Auckland), Volume 1, Issue 59, 1 June 1927, Page 4

"Business Acumen in Auckland"

C.O.D. PARCEL SYSTEM

REPLY TO DEPUTATION (From Our Resident Reporter.) WELLINGTON, Tuesday. One of the chief arguments used by the deputation to the Prime Minister to-day seeking the abolition of the c.o.d. parcels system was that, in spite of the huge population of Auckland and the comparatively small population on the West Coast, the figures for the use of the system at Westport exceeded those recorded at Auckland by 5 to 3. This comparison drew from the Prime Minister the remark: “They show some business acumen in Auckland. They are up against keen competition and have to watch their own interests. On the Coast, on the other hand, many of the people there are miners who have come from Home and they retain connection with the houses of business in the Old Country.” The attitude of the Post and Telegraph Department was outlined by Mr. Harrison, of the Post and Telegraph Department, who said that the Department did not ask for the system, but merely provided the facility when it was asked for. The request was originally made by the British Government. He claimed that the c.o.d. system was growing at the expense of the mail-order system, and that the public were simply changing from one sys- , tern to the other. He quoted figures to show this. The Department did not desire and did not intend to take sides on the matter. The Prime Minister: To what extent are the retailers themselves using the c.o.d. system? Mr. Harrison: We have not investigated the matter sufficiently far to produce figures on the point, but from parcels we have opened in company with the Customs people we find that the system is used to some extent by retailers here. Mr. W. Simm, heading the deputation, said the retailers were subjected to the most harassing restrictions in some directions, and yet Home firms were able to send their stuff into the Dominion without inspection. The Prime Minister said the general principle was whether the public should be allowed to have facilities to secure goods from other places. Mr. Harrison said that having once granted the facility the Department was diffident about removing it without very sufficient reason.

Mr. Coates: Well, it is a question whether the interests represented here are sufficient to destroy the public interest, or what may be considered to be the public interest. You are no different from several other businesses in the country. In fact, this is not so hard on you as the hardships some other business firms are suffering. Some firms have not sufficient accommodation. It is the general principle that will have to he considered.