Efficiency Standards

Sun (Auckland), Volume II, Issue 616, 19 March 1929, Page 8

Efficiency Standards

Farmers and Industrialists

A PROPOSAL made by manufacturing interests last evening for increasing efficiency on farms throughout New Zealand was received coldly by farmers' representatives, and ultimately was shelved for the time being. The authors of the scheme were told in effect that industrial charity began at home, though ready assurance was given that no slur upon primary industry was intended.

proposal, which originated with Mr. G. Finn, president of the Auckland Manufacturers’ Association, was advanced toward the close of a long discussien between farmers and manufacturers upon protective tariffs and general Industrial problems. As the future prosperity of the Dominion depended upon efficient production, Mr. Finn said, the Government should be asked to make a survey of 50 farms in each province to enable the percentage of efficiency to be ascertained. The farms would be judged

according to a sdale of points to be drawn up for the purpose, a similar survey to be made every five years and substantial prizes to be awarded to the most efficient. “You have statistics for everything,” Mr. Finn argued when presenting his proposal. “You have figures for your herd-testing figures which have shown what improvement is possible in the output—and you know also that some farms are not efficient. But you do not know the provincial standard of efficiency. If the Government made a survey in the provinces and showed the degree of efficiency there, we would know how the primary industries were progressing.” The announcement was not received enthusiastically hy the farmers’ representatives who immediately asked what good if was hoped to accomplish, and suggested that something of the sort was being done at the present time by a Government inspector. The suggestion of a prize for the most efficient farm, moreover, was considered beneath the dignity of the farming industry, and this reference was struck off the proposal. Further elucidating his idea, Mr. Finn explained that committees in the provinces would have charge of the competition, and the prizes—if this principle were agreed to—would be

allocated by them. It might be that 500 farms would enter for the competition. but the committee in each province would narrow them down. It was suggested by Captain Colbeck that you cannot make a man efficient by telling him he is not so. Mr. J. Findlay: That is just what you can do. If we find a man is not up to the mark, we tell him so and bring him up to it.

WHAT PRODUCES EFFICIENCY? The sturdy argument that competition is the' best efficiency-producer was adduced by Mr. R. Feisst, who reminded the manufacturers that fisui-es over a period of years showed that primary industries had progressed more than had secondary production. Was it not in the direction of secondary industries that the competition for efficiency should be instituted? Since the war the production per head by those engaged in primary industries had increased enormously, whereas the production per unit over the whole of New Zealand was the same as in pre-war times. The inference, he said, was obvious —other industries must have decreased. Mr. Findlay could not see why this should detract from any endeavour to increase the standard of exportable produce. On recent figures. New Zealand cheese was selling on London market at 20s a cwt. below that of Canada. If the standard could be raised to Canada’s level, the producers would net an extra £1,000,000. Captain Colbeck: The standard is right. We have half the men on the land that we had a few years ago and twice the output.

Mr. Finn: Yes; but is their efficiency standard determined? Captain Colbeck: When you get to Heaven you will be asking for efficiency tests.

FEWER COWS—GREATER OUTPUT Mr. Finn: But if the standard of production of any farm could be raised from, say, 60 per cent, to 75 per cent., what a difference it would make! Mr. A. E. Robinson reminded the conference that the average yield of milking cows in the average had been raised from 1691 b. six years ago to 2001 b. to-day. This, over the country, meant from £4,500,000 to £6,000,000 a season to dairymen. Yet there were less dairymen and less cows on the farms to-day than six years ago. A general discussion upon the merits of the proposal revealed a wide difference of opinion, and at certain stages the farmers' representatives resented the suggestion that they alone should be the centre of an efficiency-producing competition. Why not have it over the whole of industry, they asked? It was a slur upon the primary industries which had progressed so well, someone suggested. Mr. Finn readily assured the conference that no slur was intended. On the contrary his desire was to foster industry generally, promote the general welfare and, if possible, unite the primary and secondary phases of production. In the face of the cold reception of the scheme, he held it over for further consideration.